Skip to main content

Full text of "St Luke, the prophet"

See other formats





Alfred C. Barnes 

Date Due 


U. S. A. 


NO. 23233 

Cornell University Library 
BS2595 .S46 

St Luke, the prophet / by Edward Carus S 


3 1924 029 342 304 

The original of tliis book is in 
tine Cornell University Library. 

There are no known copyright restrictions in 
the United States on the use of the text. 









All rights reserved 


3. wx^t 









One object of the present volume is, within its pre- 
scribed limits, to combat a kind of agnosticism, 
by which term I mean the application of the 
formula 'we do not know' to masses of details of 
the New Testament by some of those who study it 
and teach it. The attempt is here made to re- 
arrange the data so as to interpret the unknown by 
the light of the known, and to diminish the number 
of those New Testament expressions, the bearing of 
which has to be 

'won from the void and formless infinite' 

of fluctuating statement which is apt to leave them in 
the vortex of obscurity and doubt. If these unknown 
data can be co-ordinated with the known, then our 
knowledge will be substantially increased : and I 
earnestly and respectfully claim that they can. 

As an instance of the agnosticism in question, the 
genuineness of the Second Epistle of Peter is 
now being surrendered by many. But it would not 
be creditable to the Christian Church to retain in 
her New Testament a writing which her authorities 


were content to throw over into the middle of the 
second century with the gentle blessing of ' pseudony- 
mous epistle.' If by such a capitulation alone she 
could explain 2 Peter; in regard to its phrases and 
intention and origin, as simply the expression of an 
intelligent forger, she would be right and bound to 
capitulate, provided always she went on to erase the 
forgery from her pages. But now, while admitting 
the forgery — -there is no other word for a treatise 
which, not in its title, but in its text, professed to 
be what it was not — some orthodox theologians 
would fain ignore the bearing of this forgery on 
the rest of the New Testament and at the same 
time would continue to be agnostic withal as to its 
phraseology and meaning and origin and connection 
with the Canon. What position could be more 
damaging to the consistency and proficiency of those 
who held it .? 

I use the term proficiency advisedly. For a belief 
in Christianity must ever be a belief in its power to 
save and renew and uplift the soul of man, and not 
merely a historical knowledge of the fact that it once 
possessed this power. It must be efficient in a for- 
ward direction, and this is to be proficient. The 
force of current orthodoxy is well-nigh spent as a 
proficient power — exhausted in maintaining a certain 
kind of equilibrium. Compelled in spite of mis- 
givings to ally itself with other forces of a beneficent 
kind, it continually attracts the notice and invites the 


criticism of the world which it claims to move ; but 
when the world interrogates orthodoxy, it finds to its 
surprise that orthodoxy has room in its capacious 
province for an agnosticism of its own origins^as it 
were an unexplored dark region which certain 
shadowy creatures, the ancestors of known office- 
holders, are supposed to have tenanted and held in 
sway. Can we not then obtain the key to this dark 
place ? Who were those first officers of the Church, 
and what was their character? Who were the first 
believers in Christ? On what grounds chiefly did 
they found their belief? These are questions which 
for friend and foe alike require to be answered. No 
civilising power can be content to leave its own 
territory unexplored and unmapped. No spiritual 
power can be proficient while it is agnostic within 
its own province, and while it tends, if I mistake not, 
to inculcate a mental equilibrium which many persons 
identify with a via media, but which in fact largely 
rests upon agnosticism. 

Such then, in part, is the relation of the present 
essay to current theology. But formally it is not 
apologetic nor written in the strain of an apologist. 
It is not more one-sided than all the data together 
compel it to be. It is undertaken as a sequel to The 
Christian Prophets, and it pursues some trains of 
thought outlined in that volume, to which many 
references are given. In writing it the author be- 
came convinced that the present tendency, after 


Renan and others, to relegate 2 Peter to the end 
of the second century was wholly perverse and un- 
satisfactory, and while further testing his theory 
stated ■ in the former work that St Luke wrote 2 
Peter for St Peter at Rome, he has found so much 
light thrown upon it by the Acts and the Epistles, 
and especially by the Book of Enoch (chapter IV), 
that he ventures to set it forth at greater length. It 
has led him directly and by clear and unmistakeable 
evidence to the identification of Luke with Silas, to 
the explanation of unsolved difficulties in Acts xvi. 
Acts ii, and other passages (chapters II and VIII) 
to the correlation of the Ephesians with i Peter 
(chapter VI), and to the conclusion, more than 
warranted by the comparison of their contents, that 
both are epistles of conciliation between St Paul and 
St Peter, rendered necessary by the writing of the 
second chapter of the Galatians (chapter V). The 
idea of a great conciliation of the followers of St 
Paul and St Peter respectively in the second century 
is not favoured so much by the present generation 
as it was by the generation before Bishop Lightfoot. 
Yet the vogue which it enjoyed can hardly have been 
entirely groundless. The view here propounded is 
simply that the principals and not their followers 
were conciliated. I am not conscious of being 
influenced by Baur, whose works I have not read, 
but it is strange that readers, whether critics or not, 
whether of Baur's school or not, should shut their 


eyes first to the fact that a written attack was made 
by one Apostle upon another, and then to the 
inevitable sequel of this fact. Withdrawal of the 
Epistle to the Galatians was impossible. Redress 
alone remained. And redress upon Christian lines 
of true feeling was quickly forthcoming. It was 
easy because it was quick. The followers of Paul 
and Peter a century later would have found con- 
ciliation impossible — as impossible as the Montanists 
and the orthodox found it then, or earlier still. But 
Paul and Peter themselves, aided by Luke and guided 
by the Holy Spirit, found it easy. 

The lines of enquiry here undertaken extend over 
some ground which is, so far as the author knows, 
hitherto unoccupied and neglected. The neglect, 
which now issues in the dilemma concerning 2 Peter, 
is due to two chief causes : first, the paramount effect 
of the Septuagint (Greek translation of the Old 
Testament made about 280 B.C. at Alexandria) in 
moulding the thoughts of the first Christian disciples 
has been very imperfectly appreciated ; and next, the 
Christian Prophets -have not been allowed by com- 
mentators, ever since the second century, to have 
been the chief living force in the transmission 
of the faith. How the belief in Jesus as the Christ 
arose in the hearts of the first believers is surely one 
of the most profoundly interesting questions that can 
occupy the mind of man. We cannot afford to 
neglect any single line of evidence which bears 


upon it. Yet we have neglected many. To the 
answering of it this book is a humble and hearty 

At first it may seem that any conclusions which 
appertain to the Christian Prophets deserve to be 
damned with the faint praise of ' ingenious,' or more 
resolutely set aside as ' far-fetched ' or ' obscure.' But 
to say that a series of coincidences between the Book 
of Jesus (Joshua) and the thoughts of Paul and Silas 
is far-fetched will not be the least drawback to the 
cogency of its truth. The common-sense of the 
English reader is apt to be more impatient of far- 
fetching than is the ingenuity of the German ; but 
while I tax my fellow-countrymen's patience, I may 
assure them that this volume owes hardly anything 
to German ingenuity, which has ignored the ' fulfil- 
ments ' described by St Luke and St Paul almost as 
much as the devout common-sense of our English 
commentators. At the same time I am greatly 
indebted to Blass's scholarly Latin Commentary on 
Acts, and to Zahn's Einleitung, in whose reasonings 
and conclusions I have found a useful check for my 
own. In England we are generally unwilling to 
make the effort to place ourselves in the position of 
the first Apostles, to see with their eyes and read 
with their minds and interpret with their powers. 
The imperfections of the present treatise are due to 
this very inability on the author's part ; they are not 
inherent in the method which he follows, nor in the 


lines on which he has begun to work and which he 
hopes that others may carry further. 

Starting, then, with the clear perception obtained 
in chapters I-III that Luke is Silas and a Prophet, we 
find that an entirely new light is thrown upon the 
reality of the history of the Acts. The latter half of 
that book contains so much lively narrative that it 
appeals to all ; yet probably few readers have sur- 
mised how much prophetic thought underlies some of 
its chapters, especially the bright episodes of Philippi 
and Troas. The former half, with its preponderance 
of speeches and addresses, has appealed to the more 
thoughtful students of doctrine, but even they must 
have found some difficulties pressing for solution in 
several chapters besides St Stephen's speech- — which 
passage (and also ' Gnosticism ' and ' Ebionism ') I 
may here promise not to inflict upon my kind reader 
in the following pages. There is enough requiring 
his attention already in the relation of the Pentecostal 
gift to Christian Prophecy (chapter VIII), in the 
parallelism of the two halves of the Acts (chapter 
IX), in the use of Old Testament (LXX) quota- 
tions, in the comparison of the two recensions of the 
text of the Acts, and especially in the use of the 
Book of Enoch by the writer of Acts, and other 
problems. The one serious objection which lies 
against the first-century date of Acts— its reference 
to Theudas in the mouth of Gamaliel — is, I believe, 
removed by the remarks in chapter IX. How much 


criticism adverse to the genuineness and integrity of 

the Acts has been recently based upon the reference 

to Theudas will be plain to anyone who reads the 

Encydopadia Biblica, Art. Acts. 

At the same time it must be admitted that 

the proofs of the historical character of Acts and of 

the genuineness of i and 2 Peter are not to be 

obtained without purchase at a price, and the price 

is one which some readers will be at first unwilling 

to pay. It is the recognition of the Book of Enoch 

as a storehouse of thought for St Luke (chapters V 

and VIII) and St Paul as well as St Jude. And here 

I am tempted to parody my Horace and to say of 

ourselves : 

Ennochus in manibus non est et mentibus haeret 
paene recens. 

Enoch, like Ennius, is not in our hands and stored 
in our head as an almost modern writer — modern, 
that is, in the days of the Apostles ! They, on the 
other hand, held him in their hands and in their 
head, but little knew how modern he was. They 
were mistaken in assigning him a great antiquity. 
We are told by Dr. Charles that the oldest part of 
his book was not much more than two centuries, and 
the latest part a century, older than St Paul. These 
dates may be subject to slight correction, but what- 
ever be the age of the Book of Enoch, few readers 
will be found to dispute the abundant references to it 
set forth in the following pages as made by St Paul 


and St Luke. ' The House of the Great King which 
is builded in glory for evermore' ; the 'Awake thou 
that sleepest' ; the 'Angels desiring to look down upon ' 
the earth ; the Seven weeks crowned with Pente- 
cost and followed by the Eighth week of ' Right- 
eousness ' ; the ' Parthians and the Medes ' ; all these 
Enochian figures and many more have furnished the 
sacred writers with imagery and framework for 
passages of higher inspiration which have long 
become household words. This inspiration comes 
from the life of Him who will not suffer us to call 
what God has cleansed common or unclean. Nothing 
short of the express image of His Glory could lend 
lustre to the tawdry hangings, the vapid daubs, or 
the lurid pictures of this miscellaneous Book of 
Enoch. But this He has done. He has illuminated 
literature as He has purified character. He is the 
Master who inspires the scholarly Luke as He is the 
Lord who claims the service of our life. He came in 
and out amongst us through an Enochian atmosphere 
and yet His personality is not obscured ; " the smell 
of fire has not passed on Him " ; He ever liveth, and 
we shall not cease to worship Him. 

I avail myself of this preface to dispose of some 
of the more superficial objections to the cardinal 
statements of this volume and its predecessor. For 
instance, with regard to such a question as that of 
Babylon being Rome I have no more doubt than 


1 have in regard to ' Auld Reekie ' being Edinburgh. 
It is not a theory which is set against another theory 
with some shew of equilibrium ; it is an absolute 
certainty. There is no charge brought against any 
man's good faith in the following pages ; but let 
me here say that no one who denies that Babylon 
is Rome can have studied the books of the entire New 
Testament with a coherent intelligence, nor can he 
possess a sound grasp of their meaning as documents. 
The writers of the Apocalypse and i Peter and 

2 Thessalonians wrote from a very different standing- 
point from any that is natural to us now •. probably 
this will be admitted. They had their reasons for 
using such expressions as 'Maran atha,' and 'he that 
letteth,' and ' the spirit of Jesus,' and ' KatSgor ' 
('Accuser,' in Rev xii lo), and for omitting Dan 
from the Twelve tribes without reducing the number 
to Eleven: (see The Christian Pw/z^^^j, chapter VIII). 
They wished to speak as Christian Prophets spoke, 
and they wished to write so that the Roman authori- 
ties, if they captured their letters, might not under- 
stand quite all their contents. Though they wrote 
usually, not always, for the congregation, they certainly 
did not write for the express convenience of the 
juvenile reader in the twentieth century, nor did they 
believe it possible that the world should survive so 
long. Thus they have left us the necessity of taking 
their point of view. Our understanding of their 
writings wholly depends upon our taking it. Nor is 


common-sense interpretation possible until we liave 
made an effort of an uncommon kind at the outset 
of our studies, the effort to see things as a very 
uncommon class of persons saw them, and saw them 
chronologically the first. 

Another of the idola fori, as Bacon would call 
them, is the prejudice that Christian Prophets must 
be found to prophesy events of the distant future or 
else forfeit their title to the name. It does not lie 
within my province to determine how far ahead the 
Prophets of the Old Testament could or could not 
forecast the future. But in some remarks on this 
subject in chapter IV, I have contended strongly for 
one necessary point — -that they meant to speak what 
their contemporaries understood, and they believed 
that the latter understood them. There is no doubt 
that the Christian Prophets intended and believed the 
same : they meant their contemporaries to understand, 
and believed that they did so. The reader who will 
start with this admission may claim as much predictive 
ability for the Prophets as he thinks fit, or as little : 
but without this admission he will derive little benefit 
from the ' Hear, O heavens ; and give ear, O earth,' 
or from any other appeal of the Old Testament 

Three points emerge clearly from the observation 

of the statements in the New Testament concerning 

the Prophets. First: the Christian Prophets laid 

stress upon their corporate unity and continuity with 


xviii PREFACE 

the Prophets of antiquity ; and some attempt has 
been made by the present writer to shew the evidence 
for the existence of a prophetic chain of literature 
from 400 B.C. to 70 A.D. in The Christian Prophets. 

Next: they did not aim at reproducing what we 
should call the originality of their Old Testament 
predecessors, because they were standing as they 
believed on the last steps of time, at ' the end of the 
age,' and they were conscious that the exceeding 
great volume of prophecy behind them, while it 
needed no further addition at their hands, charged 
them with the duty of finding 'fulfilment' in every 
current event, and declaring it when found. 

Thirdly : the organs of this declaration to the 
world at large were the Apostles who were, as 
Missionary Prophets, a higher degree of the order of 
Prophets, and ranked above the rest ; but so far from 
being limited to twelve or thirteen or fourteen in 
number, there were in fact scores of Apostles, as 
there had been scores of Prophets before our Saviour, 
who was the Apostle (Heb iii i), indeed before He 
was the Saviour. 

Another idolon must be mentioned. It is rather 
an idol, or prejudice, of the cave. It says that what is 
here stated cannot be true or it would have been 
discovered long ago. Beyond the fact that we have 
ignored the character of the Christian Prophets I 
cannot tell the reason why certain conclusions of the 
first importance have not been drawn many a time 


before this. Some of those here mentioned have 
been drawn, though I have not seen Schwanbeck's 
treatise on Silas and Luke : otliers have never seen 
the Hght before. But we are all apt to miss what 
lies at our very feet, and to fail in putting one and 
one together. Just because Luke did not add to his 
mention of ' Silas ' the words ' who was afterwards 
called Luke,' or because he wrote sometimes of Silas, 
and sometimes of ' us,' instead of using consistently 
and always the same term, is this a reason for 
thinking that Thucydides, for instance, who calls 
himself in his history ' Thucydides,' could not have 
sometimes spoken of himself as ' me ' or ' us ' ? Should 
we say that Caesar who calls himself ' Caesar' could 
not have written the whole of his ' Commentaries' if 
we found a 'We' passage in them.'' or Jeremiah his 
prophecies in which he calls himself 'Jeremiah ' ? As 
to Xenophon, I hope that some kind friend will be 
good enough to look through his works and tell us 
whether he never speaks of himself as ' we ' or ' us.' 

But it will be urged that at least the Christian 
Fathers knew the truth on such an obvious question 
as the identity of Luke and Silas. Not at all. This is 
just where their ignorance came in. I am not now 
speaking of Clement, ' Barnabas,' and Ignatius, to 
whom I have referred in The Christian Prophets, but 
of the successors of the Apostolic Fathers. It cannot 
be too often urged that neither Justin nor Irenaeus 
nor, Tertullian nor any other knew anything about 


the personality of Luke. There is not even a 
tradition of real value. The Muratorian Canon is 
examined in chapter III. Irenaeus was in entire 
ignorance of the meaning of the greater part of the 
Apocalypse. The question of the two Johns has 
been left in confusion for us, as great as that of the 
question of the two Philips, even by Eusebius. This 
I have tried to shew in The Christian Prophets. The 
books of the New Testament the Fathers knew 
something about : the authors of them they knew 
nothing about : the meaning of them they knew very 
httle about. Between 70 and 150 the entire early 
tradition as to the authorship of the books was lost, 
and a new tradition, scanty enough, grew up. The 
Montanists (see The Christian Prophets, chapter II) 
possessed a certain amount of the force, not the 
intelligence perhaps, of the prophetic tradition, but 
they and it were hurried and harried, almost out of 
existence, about the middle of the second century. 
Our dear departed Bishop of Durham, whose death 
has occurred while these pages pass through the 
press, used (1878) to lament the vacuum of church 
history between 150 and 175 ; but there is a hardly 
less serious vacuum between 100 and 140 and a 
more serious one between 80 and lOO. And yet we 
possess enough remains of the Christian writings of 
those periods, to shew that the New Testament 
writings are vastly superior, and also to shew that 
they do not and cannot belong to the second century. 


The Christian Fathers, with their apparent know- 
ledge — ^and it is only even apparent because of our 
want of imagination — ^and their real ignorance of a 
bygone century or more before their own time, have 
been the chief cause of our failure to see what was at 
our feet. Here is an instance. Says Renan, quoting 
an observation of Jerome about 400 A.D. {Ep. ad Hebid. 
II ; cf de viris ill. i) : ' The style of 2 Peter has no 
resemblance to that of i Peter.' This one-sided and 
misleading statement I respectfully traverse, and have 
tried to treat the question more upon its merits in 
chapter V below and in The Christian Prophets. 
Renan {V Antechrist, Intr. vi) says : 

" 2 Peter is surely apocryphal. We recognise in it 
at the first glance an artificial composition, a make-up 
of scraps from apostolic writings, especially from the 
epistle of Jude. We do not insist upon this point, for 
we do not believe that 2 Peter has a single defender 
among true critics." 

Whether Renan ever vouchsafed a second or third 
glance at 2 Peter is not quite clear. My friend Dr. 
Chase has studied it, but says that he goes further 
into it and fares worse. It seems to me that he 
becomes an agnostic on this subject. I can only say 
that had either of these critics studied it in the light 
of the Book of Enoch, they would not have written as 
they have ; they would have made entire sense of 
2 Peter i and iii ; they would have understood 2 Peter 
ii at least as well as they can understand Jude ; and 


they would probably have gone further and seen 
that St Jude deals with the same necessary phase in 
the evolution of the Christian faith which Silas him- 
self had witnessed at Corinth (chapter VI'I). I 
venture to think that there is no difficulty whatever 
in the explanation of 2 Peter as a document, nor in 
the interpretation of any single verse of it ; the orily 
difficulties which remain are inherent in the original 
materials on which it rests, especially the Trans- 
figuration of Christ. Mystery, in the true sense of 
that misapplied term, begins when we come into 
touch with Life and Being : it does not belong to 
the interpretation of words. As men, it envelops us ; 
as readers of the Bible, it does not. The one thing 
essential to the understanding of 2 Peter is the right 
point of view, which is that of a Christian Prophet 
between 60 and 70 A.D. Let us put one and one 
together and count the Christian post-apostolic 
Fathers as naught until their knowledge upon our 
subject can be proved to be of value. At present 
they are the source of a dangerous agnosticism. 

I cherish a hope that this treatise may meet the 
eye of Jewish students of prophecy and its interpreta- 
tion, and that it may interest some of them to see 
how closely the first Christians held to the church 
WHICH IS, and how eagerly they sought fulfilments 
of words and events which belonged to the great 
body of Jewish prophetic doctrine, as waymarks 
along the road tliat led them to eternal Life. That 



St Luke was a Jew, and that there is no ground for 
the other supposition ; that St Paul, so far from 
breaking with his ancient Church, whose is ' the 
adoption as a son, and the glory, and the covenants, 
and the lawgiving, and the worship, and the promises,' 
remained a Jew to the last in every fibre of his 
being, while he recognised the Door of faith as wide 
open to the 'Gentiles,' beside the Door of circum- 
cision ; that all the early Christians were, with all 
Hellenists, nursed upon the Greek Old Testament, 
widely as it diverges from the Hebrew in every page ; 
these are facts which will become more and more 
patent to all careful students, and they will throw us 
back more and more upon a careful investigation of 
the LXX, which the labours of Dr. Swete have now 
made so accessible in a convenient form to all 
readers. Instead of being a dreary waste of mis- 
translations, it appears to me that very many pages 
of the LXX require attention in every variation df 
their reading, in order that we may ascertain, if 
possible, the ipsissima verba which welcomed the eye 
of the Christian Prophets and those who discussed 
with them the first foundations of the Christian faith. 
If there are Freemasons who search into the origins 
of their own order, they will find in the following 
pages that their ruling idea is the great idea which 
ruled the Apostolic mind — that of 'the House of the 
great King which is builded in glory for evermore.' 
Into the questions, how far and since what time the 



order has diverged from Christianity, the present 
treatise has not ventured to go. But the writer has 
satisfied his mind of the fact of such historical con- 
nection. Whether the chain of it has passed through 
the Apostles or not, the order has certainly in its 
passage down the ages from the Temple of Solomon 
linked itself on to the Book of Enoch, with which 
the Apostolic preaching was powerfully connected. 

The following pages contain few references to the 
Gospel of St Luke, which, though it proceeds equally 
with Acts from the pen of Silas, is too great a field to 
be treated in the same volume. 

I believe that the English reader who does not 
possess a knowledge of Greek or Hebrew will not 
find any increased difficulty in following what is here 
written. In writing argumentatively almost through- 
out, I have only obeyed the necessity of things, and 
have not willingly passed over any part of the subject 
undertaken. I have to thank Dr. Robertson NicoU 
for kindly allowing some pages of chapter II to 
appear in The Expositor, 1901. 

While I have freely criticised the Revised Version 
of the New Testament — as I believe the Revisers 
would wish it criticised when they said, ' Blemishes 
and imperfections will assuredly be found in our own 
Revision ' — I cannot express too strongly my sense 
of its immeasurable advance upon the Authorised 
Version for the understanding of the Apostles' 
writings. When a new English version is under- 


taken, it will follow the Authorised Version more 
closely in the Gospels than the Revised Version has 
done, but diverge from it far more widely in the 
Epistles. Meanwhile The New Testament in Greek 
by Westcott and Hort (denoted by WH in these 
pages) is the standard by which every student, in 
England at least, will be guided. This recognition 
does not release us from the duty of making the 
thoughts of the New Testament writers, and their 
trains of thought, our primary study, to which the use 
of the Concordance for the study of words must ever 
be subordinate. 

In conclusion, in the words of Bacon, I would here 
" humbly and earnestly beg, that human things may 
not prejudice such as are divine ; neither that from 
the unlocking of the gates of sense and the kindling 
of a greater natural light, anything of incredulity or 
intellectual night may arise in our minds towards 
divine mysteries. But rather that by our mind 
thoroughly cleansed and purged from fancy and 
vanities, and yet subject and perfectly given up to 
the divine oracles, there may be given unto faith the 
things that are faith's. Amen." 

St. Bartholomew's Day, 1901. 


The Names, Luke and Prophet. 

The use of alternative names by Jews, p. I. Silvanus and Silas: 
Lucanus and Lucas, p. 3. Origin of the name Silas, p. 6. Lucanus, 
Lucius, and Luke, p. II. The Church in Antioch that IS, p. 15. 
The Prophets and Teachers at Antioch, Lucius, p. 17. Apostles 
and Prophets, p. 20. First Function of the Prophets, p. 21. The 
Rules of the Prophets in Session, p. 24. The Rules of the Prophets 
on Circuit. The ' Teaching of the xii Apostles,' p. 25. Prophets 
and Apostles identical in O.T. , p. 29 : in N.T. , p. 30. 


The Travel-Document or Journey-Record or AVe- 
document of the acts. 

Not a foreign document incorporated, p. 33. Prophetic Descriptions, 
p. 35. ' Fulfilments ' of Prophecy, p. 36. ' They of the circumcision ' 
at Rome, p. 38 note. The We-document is prophetic, p. 39. The 
Preaching of Apostles governed by ' fulfilments,' p. 40. The ' Spirit of 
Jesus' fulfilling Joshua, p. 43. At Troas, p. 44. Macedonia the 
' portion ' of the Promised Land of Europe, p. 46. Philippi fulfils 
Jericho, p. 48. Gangas fulfils Gilgal, p. 51. Places in Macedonia 
fulfil Benjamin's portion, p. 54. Thessalonica and Selo, p. 56. Jason 

xxviii CONTENTS 

and Lot, p. 58. Troas and Sarepta, p. 58. The circumcision of 
Timothy, p. 60. The submission to the law, p. 61. The Elders who 
had seen the Lord, p. 62. St I'aul's speech at Miletus, p. 64. At 
Jerusalem : James' rash counsel, p. 65. Jewish views of Antichrist, 
p. 67. St Paul is Antichrist to the Jews, p. 70. The Romans in 
Daniel, p. 74. 


SiLVANUs' Disappearance and Luke's Appearance. 

The standing-point of the writer of Acts, p. 75. Attitude to the 
Jews, p. 78. Roman citizenship, p. 80. Close blending of the We- 
passages with the rest of Acts, p. 82. Prophets travelled in 
pairs, p. 82. The movements of Silas in Acts, p. 84. Silas at Philippi, 
p. 86, at Beroea, p. 88. Silas disappears, p. 90. Silvanus in the 
Epistles, p. 91. The brother praised in all the churches, p. 92. 'I, 
Tertius, who write,' p. 93. Resumption of We in the third journey, 
p. 96. The Churchwardens, 97. The Doberian, p. 98. Historical 
value of the Western Recension, p. 99. ' Luke the Healer, the Beloved,' 
p. 103. The Muratorian Fragment, p. 105. Luke 'the True Yoke- 
Fellow,' p. 107. Luke is Silvanus and Silas, p. no. 

St Luke in the Petrine Epistles. 

Style of the Petrine Epistles, p. 1 14. 2 Peter ' ambitious ' in style, 
p. 115. Quotations of O.T. in the Petrine Epistles, p. 116. The 
position of the Christian Prophets in i Peter, p. 118. Dr. Hort on 
St Paul and Isaiah, p. 119 note. The O.T. Prophets did not seek out 
their own meaning, p. 120. The Angels looking down into the fulfil- 
ments, p. 122. Fulfilments, primary and secondary, p. 124. O.T. 
Prophecy is free from hidden suggestions, p. 126. Christian Prophecy 
recognised in I Peter and 2 Peter, p. 129. Use of Apocryphal books 
in I Peter and 2 Peter, p. 130. The Water of the Deluge, 
p. 131. The Fire of the Destruction of the Earth, p. 133. Quotations 
from Enoch, pp. 134 ff. The Water of the Destruction of the Earth, 
p. 137. The Spirits in prison in i Peter and Enoch, p. 139. The 
House of the Great King in the same, p. 141. Hort on the Royal 


Priesthood, p. 143 note. The Eighth Week and Pentecost in St Luke, 
p. 14s note. The House of God in 2 Peter, p. 147. 2 Peter i 3-10 
explained, p. 148. Luke the Physician, p. 150 note. 

St Luke Reconciles his Senior Apostles. 

Usages of the Petrines and St Luke ; use of tc, 151. References to 
the Holy Spirit, p. 154. Dr. S. Davidson on the styles of the Petrines, 
p. 156. Peter claims to be by Luke as 2 Peter shews itself to be, p. 160. 
St Peter and St Paul meeting in Rome, p. 162. St Luke as Media- 
tor, p. 164. The lines of St Peter's teaching, p. 166. ' The faithful 
brother as Peter accounts him,' p. 169. Luke's proposal of redress to 
write I Peter, p. 170. His further proposal of redress to write 2 Peter, 
p. 172. Introduction to Luke's Gospel, p. 173. The influence of Luke 
in Ephesians, p. 175. Shortcomings of i Peter from the Pauline point 
of view, p. 177. Hort on Ephesians and i Peter, p. 179. Peter's 
knowledge of Greek, p. 181. 

St Paul's Ephesians and St Luke's i Peter. 

Their incessant correspondences, p. 183. In Ephesians i, p. 184. In 
Ephesians ii, p. 186. The Treatment of the O.T. passages by the 
Christian Prophets, p. 188. i Peter does not copy Romans, p. 193. 
The stone of the Builders, p. 194. A side-light on the Lucan author- 
ship of 2 Peter, p. 195. Parable of the Husbandmen, p. 196. History 
of the combined citations, p. 198. Meaning of the term Revelation, 
p. 199. Prophets and Apostles, p. 202 note. ' Unsearchable,' p. 203 
note. Ephesians iii and i Peter, p. 203. ' Unity ' in Ephesians, 
p. 204. Ephesians iv and i Peter, p. 205. ' Baptism ' in the Roman 
Epistles of Paul, p. 207. Ephesians v and i Peter, p. 208. Genuine- 
ness of Ephesians, p. 211. To whom was it addressed? p. 213. They in 
Ephesus WHO ARE: Jesus WHO IS Lord Messiah, p. 215. 
Zahn on Ephesians ; Baur ; Holtzmann, p. 219. What was included 
in St Paul's sphere of work, p. 223. The Gentiles who were Jewish 
proselytes, p. 227. 



St Luke and St Jude. 

Does Jude refer to the written 2 Peter ? p. 230. Analysis of Jude, p. 231. 
Features of the intruders into .the body of the faithful Called, p. 233. 
The phraseology of Jude, p. 235. The scope of Jude and Zahn's date for 
it, p. 238. The approximate date of Jude, p. 241. The supposed 
quotation by Jude of 2 Peter, p. 244. Oral and written prophecy, 
p. 245. Apostles and Prophets, p. 247. The intention to write a larger 
work — a Gospel, p. 249. Closer inquiry into the date of Jude, p. 252. 
Closer parallelism of 2 Peter and Jude, p. 253. The connection be- 
tween St Peter and 2 Peter, p. 258. 2 Peter and the Corinthian 
Church, p. 259. Christian faith and licentiousness, p. 260. 2 Peter ii 
parallel with I and 2 Cor., p. 261. 

The Prophetic Character of Acts i-xii. 

The two recensions of Acts, ^ and a contrasted together generally, 
p. 266. A disappearing prophetic mode of thought in ;8, p. 271. The 
Acts not a production of the second century, p. 272. The Pentecostal 
account in Acts and the Book of Enoch, p, 275. Parable of the Unjust 
Steward, p. 279 note. The Apostles' utterance at Pentecost was 
psalmodic, p. 283. Dr. Martineau on the Acts, p. 285 note. The 
Potter's Field of Zechariah, p. 286 note. The use of the Hallelujah 
Psalms, p. 288. The prophetic fulfilment of Acts i, ii : ' Habitation,' 
p. 293. Papias on Judas Iscariot, p. 294. Confusion of tongues, 
p. 295. Parthians and Medes, p. 297. The Building of the House of 
the Great King, 299. The rushing mighty wind and the fire, p. 300. 
The fulfilment of Psalm .xvi : is the Psalm Davidic ? p. 303. 


Parallelism of the Acts. 

Passages in Acts referring to Ecstasy, Simon Magus, Philip, p. 307. 
The Conversion of Saul, p. 311. Dr. J. Martineau on Retrospective 
Reconstruction in Acts, p. 313. Parallelism of the two halves of Acts, 


p.319. Its true basis, Psalm cxlvi, p. 320. • Selection in Acts based on 
a principle, p. 326. Gamaliel's mention of Theudas, p. 327. Josephus 
on Theudas and Athronges, p. 332. The multitude of instances of 
healing and of magic, p. 337. The conversion of Peter, p. 339. 

Some Further Traces of the Origin of the Acts. 

The release of Peter from prison, p. 346. More light from the Western 
Recension, p. 349. The soldiers of Palestine, p. 351. Fulfilment of 
Psalms, p. 355. Traces of Luke's whereabouts ; at Antioch, p. 356. 
Theory of ft p. 361. Another trace at Antioch, p. 363. Christian 
Prophets full of the Holy Ghost, p. 364. Luke has intimate 
knowledge of Silas, p. 366. Luke at Corinth, where he knows 
intimately St Paul's method of preaching, p. 369. Date of the Acts, 
p. 372. Contents of the continuation of Acts, p. 374. Its suppres- 
sion, p. 375. 

INDEX OF Names and Subjects, p. 380. 


The use of alternative names by Jews. 

The price which the Jews of old had to pay, as 
a nation, for their exclusive privilege as the covenant 
people of God, was exclusion from the ordinary 
transactions of the human race. They could not 
despise or pity the nations of the world as un- 
circumcised heathens and at the same time mix 
with them on equal terms. Yet such was their 
industry, persistence, and financial ability, that, as 
individuals, there was always a place for them 
among the easy-going and necessitous Gentiles, 
which they were quick to occupy. And as if to 
prove their adaptability to the society in which they 
called themselves 'strangers of the dispersion,' to 
commend themselves as adopted sons of Greek and 
Roman civilisation, to shew that they were in the 
world if not of it, and prepared to be useful to it 
in the ways of commerce, it had become their habit, 
in the first century and earlier, to assume a second 


name which was Greek or Roman in form. Thus 
a Saul or Sha'ool became known as Paulus, a 
Joseph, Jussuf or Josephus moved among Gentiles as 
Hegesippus, a Jesus or a Joseph might also become 
Justus, a Miriam Maria. This additional name might 
or might not entirely supplant the original Hebrew 
name, but it usually bore some relation to it of 
sound or sense. It was often a direct translation. 
Thus we may suppose that Aquila was the Gentile 
name of the ]&\w Nesher (Adler, Eagle). Or again 
the choice might be suggested by a nick -name. Or 
again it might be based upon the common usage 
of the patronymic, by which it is commonly supposed 
that Nathaniel, whose Gentile name is unknown — 
but it might, for some bearers of the name, have 
been Theodorus or Theodotus, — is to be identified 
with Bar-tholmai or Bartholomew. Nor should we 
be surprised to find that any Simon, son of John, 
or Bar-Jonas, would assume the classical name of 
lonides,! by translation of the Hebrew prefix for 
Son of, combined with transliteration of the father's 

It follows that a plurality of names is to be ex- 
pected in the case of almost any Jew. We are not 
so familiar with cases of men bearing four names, 
but Simon Peter's is one, for he was not only Simon 

^See The Christian Prophets, pp. io8, 163 f., where the termination 
-Ion of Aristion would also suggest Ionia, the Roman proconsular 
Asia, as the birthplace. 


and Peter, but Symeon and Cephas, and Peter is 
the only one of the four names which is Greek. 
Moreover his patronymic would furnish at least one 
more name. We need not then be surprised if it 
should prove that one of his contemporaries bore 
four names, which are certainly reducible to three 
by one of the commonest kinds of abbreviation. In 
proper names of Jews, therefore, we have the follow- 
ing principles at work : sound-resemblance, the 
patronymic, translation, transliteration, abbreviation. 

Silvanus and Silas: Lucanus and Lucas. 

We now proceed to the particular case of the 
name Silas.^ 

It seems to be almost universally admitted that 
the name Silas not only belongs to the same indivi- 
dual as Silvanus, but itself is contracted from 

Silvanus.^ Just as St Paul uses not the familiar ac> 

18, . 
Priscilla, but the shorter form Prisca, so conversely ro^, ^,^1 3. 

he never mentions Silas, but always uses the longer iTimfvlg?' 

form Silvanus. Other instances of the like contrac- \ JorVig. 

tion abound : Lucas is shortened from Lucanus, ' 

Parmenas from Parmenides, Demas from Demarchus 

or Demetrius. The extant inscriptions give us Asclas 

■'For this subject see the learned collection in Pape-Benseler's Wor- 
terbuch der Griechischen Eigennamen, 1884, Uebersicht xvii. 
^See e.g. Lightfoot, Notes on Epf. of St Paul, on I Th i i, p 6. 

: xviii 2, 
18, 26. 


(from Asclepius), Demosthas (from Demosthenes), 
Diomas (from Diomedes), Hermogas (from Hermo- 

t iii 12, 13. genes). The N.T. gives us Artemas from Artemi- 

;v36. dorus, Zenas from Zenodorus, Theudas from Theo- 
dorus, Olympas from Olympiodorus or Olympius, 

Dmxvii4. and probably Hermas for Hermodorus, Amplias 
(see Lightfoot on Col iv 15) for Ampliatus, Antipas 
for Antipater, Epaphras for Epaphroditus, Patrobas 
for Patrobius, Stephanas for Stephanephorus, perhaps 

3m xvi 7. Junias for Junianus, and perhaps Nymphas for 
Nymphius, Nymphodotus, or Nymphodorus. Clas- 
sical writers give us Alexas for Alexander, Artas for 
Artemas for Artemidorus, Menas for Menodorus, 
Cleopas for Cleopatrus. Thus it is clear that the 
termination of a masculine name in -as frequently 
shews the abbreviation of a longer name. 

As regards the final syllable, Lucas for Lucanus 
stands on exactly the same ground as Silas for 
Silvanus, except that the final syllable of Lucas 
bears the circumflex accent, which in Silas it does 
not. Neither is there any circumflex accent on 
Antipas, Amplias, Klebpas and others. Moreover we 
may here observe that the instances of Nymphas 
for Nymphius, Patrobas for Patrobius, and perhaps 
Olympas for Olympius, serve further to exemplify 
the lesser shortening of Lucas from the form Lucius. 

There is then no dearth of evidence to shew that 
any man bearing the name Silas was likely to be 
called by a longer name ending for instance in -anus. 


and that any Luke was likely to be called Lucanus, 
while it is not improbable that any Luke was also 
called Lucius. When we come however to enquire 
on what grounds the particular Silas of the Acts 
is identified with the particular Silvanus of the 
Pauline Epistles, the proof is not forthcoming. The 
identity, says Lightfoot, on i Th i i," appears from 
the identity of situation ascribed to the two in the 
historical narrative and the allusions in the Epistle." 
But Lightfoot seems to ignore the plain truth that 
Silas is short for Silanus, and that Silvas would 
be the short for Silvanus. The fact is that again 
and again in the N.T. the train of history has to 
be followed closely, with the aid of as much historical 
imagination as can be found, and no absolute proof 
is to be expected. A reasonable probability is not 
indeed the only guide of theology, whatever we may 
think of it as the guide of life. But in matters 
which are not doctrinal — such is the dearth of 
explicit evidence — we are obliged to be content 
with what is likely. And when these likely results 
conflict with nothing except prejudice and precon- 
ceived ideas, when they take account of all the 
phenomena, when they cannot be confronted with 
unregarded points of phrase, term, and grammar in 
the context, when they do not take shelter under 
the outworn and penetrable thatch of the pretence 
'too little is known,' and under the fence of a later 
tradition which arose out of ignorance and out of 


the desire to fill its vacuum, they will be strong 
enough to hold the field in the future as they have 
done in the past. True criticism is really construc- 
tive in its tendency. When it seems to destroy, it 
is only removing materials from a doomed edifice 
to build a new and more enduring dwelling. 

Let us now investigate in the case of Silas and 
Luke what Lightfoot has called " the identity of situa- 
tion ascribed to the two (Silas and Silvanus) in the 
historical narrative and in the [Epistles]." And first 
we take the name itself 

Origin of the name Silas. 

Jerome^ considered the name Silas to come from 
the Hebrew fT'P'lU, piel (l^UJ meaning ' sent,' ' apos- 
tolus.' And in a matter of this sort his opinion is 
entitled to consideration. It would connect it with 
jn ix 7. Siloam or Shiloah, ' which is by interpretation, sent.' 
In favour of this it may be urged that the name, if 
thus derived, suits the office which Silas in fact 
fulfilled in the pages of the N.T. He was an apostle 

Acxiv4, in the sense in which Barnabas was, and Saul was, 

Phil ii 25. if not also Epaphroditus. He was a Prophet sent 

on circuit^ to teach and preach and establish the 

■" De nom. Heb. on Silas. 

^ The Christian Prophets, pp. 1 2 f. , 1 34. 


churches. Now we can easily understand how the 
name ' Sent ' would cause its bearer, Silas, to be sent 
forth on a mission. It would strike ' the prophets 
and teachers at Antioch ' as one of those ' prophecies i Tim i is, 
which went before upon' him. He would seem to 
be, as indeed he was, providentially designed to be 
sent to the Gentiles. But on the other hand, the 
fitness of the name for the Apostle would not be less 
obvious had there been also an obvious fitness in 
its first bestowal in infancy. Though like the name 
of the prophet Nathan, ' set,' ' given,' ' appointed,' the 
name Silas might have been chosen as an omen of 
the infant's future, it might also mean that he was 
recognised as sent as God's gift, a Theodore, a Deus- 
dedit, to his parents. 

Or again, the name might be drawn from Tppip Deuxxviii 

^ ' ' 57 

Shil'yah : this is less probable.^ 

Or perhaps, what is simplest of all, the original was 
iipip'aj^ Sh'lishi, tertius, the third (child). The words, 
' I Tertius who write this Epistle' (to the Romans), Romxvi22. 
will at once suggest themselves : of this later. But 
there is another passage in Acts which appears to 
bear a play upon the name, and if so, may throw 
light upon its origin. The Hebrew for ' captain ' is 
113"'!2'b5 Shilish, and it is remarkable that where the 
word Silas is first mentioned in the Acts, the next 

' It is possible that he was so called from having been ' born with a 
caul.' It is commonly supposed by nurses to be a fortunate omen ! 
No one knows the antiquity of such beliefs. . 


Ac XV 22. words are 'chief men,'i 'men of leading,"'' avSpai 
^yov/xevovs, among the brethren. Still, if ' sent ' be 
the meaning of the name Silas, we have 'sent ' in the 
same verse. The choice between the meanings is not 
easy. One would be inclined towards Jerome's 
etymology, but for the facts (i) that both 'three' 
(' third ') and ' captain ' are translations of words 
which have for their final consonant sA, which is much 
nearer to the final s of Silas than the guttural sound 
of shilldgh ^ would be : and (2) that in Silas we have 
neither the 11 of the piel voice of ' to send,' nor the 
longer vowels of the name Siloam. It is true that, in 

'I see nothing improbable (as Davidson does, Inh'od. to N.T., vol 
ii p 20) in the expression if applied to himself by the author of the 
Acts ; but those who do so will perhaps be satisfied if they see that the 
meaning of the name Silas gives point to the expression. Had the 
expression been ' chief men among the Apostles,' then there would have 
been a neat question whether Shilla'gh, as explained in last page, would 
not be more probable than Shalish as the original meaning of Silas. 
But it would have been obviously excessive self-praise. ' Chief men 
among the biethren' implies that Judas and Silas weie hardly known at 
this time as Apostles. On the other hand, let us ask why is not the 
order of the words ' Silas and Judas '? If Silas were not the writer, the 
writer must have been well aware that Silas was far more widely known 
about 74 A.D. than Judas, even if he were Jude who wrote the Epistle, 
and far more entitled to be mentioned first. Whereas if he were the 
writer, he would put himself last from modesty. 
Is Iv ^. - The First Lesson for St Luke's day is very appropriate, but it must 

be admitted that the coincidence of verse 4, ' a leader and commander 
to the people,' is purely accidental. 

^ Dr. John Lightfoot, Works, vol. x. p. 345, ed. 1823, and also on 
Jn ix 7, distinguishes two pools of Siloam, one called rhv) Shelahh, 
Neh iii 15, 'skins,' and the other ^'h'S Shiloahh, Is viii 6, 'sent,' 
thereby admitting the etymology given in Jn ix 7 for Siloam. 


in order to get ' three ' (' third ') or ' captain ' as the 
meaning of the name of Silas, the vowel-pointing 
would have to be changed, but as there was no vowel- 
pointing written in those days, this is a minor 
consideration, especially when the name was trans- 
literated into Greek. A Greek name such as 
2aXa)?, Sal6s is entirely unknown, while 2aXe/?, SaXty, 
Salis seems only possible as a Doric abbreviation 
from Saleias, Salias. But Silas is a form which would 
be produced with ease from either Hebrew Shahldsh 
(Shlishi) or Shahlish, whereas it would not come 
so easily from Shilla'gh. The essentials are the 
sounds Sh-l-sh. 

Another consideration may be strongly urged. The 
lengthened form of Silas is said to be Silvanus. But 
Silvanus cannot be the longer form of Silas.^ It 
would have been Silanus. And Silanus was not a 
name to be shunned. It was a good Roman name. 
D. Junius Silanus had been consul A.U.C. 691. 
Another member of the family, M. Junius Silanus, 
was proconsul of Asia when St Paul was at Ephesus^ 
in 54 A.D. He was a great-grandson of Augustus. 

^ This has also been observed by Dr. F. Zimmer, "Woher kommt 
der Name ^S\ss,l" \xv Jahrb. d. Prot. TheoL, 1881, p. 721, who, more- 
over, says that "ZCKovavis^ could not throw back its accent to the 
paroxyton ZiXa;. There are but four persons named Silas in Josephus, 
and a presbyter in Egypt of that name is given in Zoega Cat. Codd. 546, 
21. See Pape-Benseler. The restoration of the name Silas in an 
epitaph at Jaffa by M. Clermont-Ganneau is what he calls only ' rela- 
tively satisfactory.' Revue Archdol., 1878, ii p. 315. 

^Tac. Ann. xiii 1. 


He fell a victim to Agrippina, as his brother, L. 
Silanus, had fallen before him. Another honourable 
Roman name, as a longer form of Silas, was Silius. 
Yet no trace of Silanus or Silius do we find in N.T. 
A corresponding objection lies against the idea that 
Silas is a, shortening from Silvanus. It would cer- 
tainly have been Silvas. 

The only alternative explanation open to those 
who identify a Silas with a Silvanus — and it is a 
sufficient explanation — is that Silvanus is lengthened 
from the original Hebretv form of Silas. We have 
then to account for the presence in Silvanus of the 
z'-sound, and in order to do so, we must infer 
that the original Hebrew name, from which Silas 
comes, contained the zz-sound of the Hebrew "i 
(vau ; see A.V. of Ps cxix 41). What then was this 
Hebrew name .'' It might seem that STipiU Shal'- 
vah, prosperity, was a name that offered the sound 
required ; but it has the objection of being a feminine 
form, and so unsuited to a man. On the whole then 
we cannot do better than suppose that 12i ipiJ? Shahlosh, 
three, which contains the vocalised v, though not the 
English w-sound, and is masculine, originated the 
longer form in Latin, Silvanus ; while the same num- 
ber or its ordinal ''ll^vP Sh'lishi, third, or indeed, 
125"'pii: Shahlish, captain, originated the shorter Silas. 


Liicamis, Lucius, and Luke. 

It will be obvious that, in the matter of names, con- 
siderable latitude was enjoyed by bilingual people 
of the first century. So far from being sticklers 
for one form as we are, for Frederic against Frederick, 
or for Claude against Claud, or for Sidney against 
Sydney, they welcomed Symeon along with Simon, 
Ananias along with Hananias, and other similar 
varieties. Is there the smallest improbability that 
a Jew whose name had become Silvanus, which in 
Latin means 'woody,' should receive another name 
in Latin of similar meaning, Lucanus, which would 
be naturally shortened into Lucius and Lucas (Luke)? 
I can see no improbability. Whether of course a par- 
ticular Silvanus was called Lucanus is a matter 
of the particular evidence only. 

Let us see whether we cannot easily imagine an 
occasion for the change from Silvanus to Lucanus. 
Let us suppose that one Silvanus was thrown with 
a genial centurion of an Italian cohort, in whose 
company he remained for some six months, associat- 
ing with him on friendly terms, telling him story 
after story from Thucydides, Herodotus, and Poly- 
bius, voyaging with him on three successive vessels, 
enduring the hardships and discomforts of the sea 
together, feeding and famishing with him at close 
quarters, till they were all shipwrecked, and then 


starting fair again towards Rome. One conclusion 
is certain, that much jocularity would have passed 
between this passenger and the centurion. Italian 
soldiers were never lacking in humour, even if given 
to brutality on occasion. Who does not recollect 
a friend at school whose name was Wood, and whose 
nickname was Timber or something synonymous? 
But Silvanus was the name of a rough country 
god. Silas was a classical and cultivated man. The 
jokes once begun upon his name would be endless. 
But it would seem that his name ought to be no 
more bucolic than his nature. He was a converted 
and civilised Wood, and his name should accordingly 
become that of a Grove ^ — Lucanus. It is at least 

' For the exact difference between silva and Iticus we can hardly have 
better evidence than the charmingly simple description by Virgil of the 
appeal of Cybele to Jupiter in Aen. ix 85 ff. 

Pinea silva mihi, multos dilecta per annos : 
Lucus in arce fuit summa, quo sacra ferebant, 
Nigranti picea trabibusque obscurus acernis. 
But there is also a reference in Virg. Aen. ix 600 to a lucus of 
Silvanus ; 

Silvano fama est veteris sacrasse Pelasgos, 
Arvorum pecorisque deo, lucumque diemque. 
Qui primi finis aliquando habuere Latinos. 
Silvanus was however an objectionable god, as any reader of ICeightley's 
Mythology may remember. To bear the identical name among Romans 
of Italy might well be distasteful, though outside Italy the objectionable 
stories about Silvanus might not be current. Jews did not mind 
adopting the names of heathen deities — strange to say — using Hermas, 
ApoUos, Zenas. But we can well imagine that the less historic name 
of Silvanus had less redeeming features than the others, and that it 
was resented. 


a fact that the author of Acts was a refined classical 
scholar. It is a fact that Julius the centurion was 
courteous. It is a fact that Silas is never called 
Silvanus by St Paul in his epistles written after his 
arrival in Rome ; and never called Lucas before 
it. This use of the name Luke has now to be 
examined, along with the question of Lucius. 

It is agreed that ' Luke, the beloved physician,' 
of Col iv 14, is the same with ' Luke my fellow- 
worker' of Philemon 24 and 2 Tim iv 11, 'only 
Luke is with me.' Luke then is with St Paul at 
Rome during the first and, let us assume, the 
second captivities. 

Lucius is mentioned twice in N.T. ' There were 
in Antioch in the existing Church,' or rather, the 
Church that IS, from everlasting to everlasting, 
' prophets and teachers, both Barnabas and Symeon 
who was called Niger, and Lucius the Cyrenian, 
Manaen too, a foster-brother of Herod the tetrarch, 
and Saul.' The passage is one of profound interest 
and importance. I understand it to say that the 
Church at Antioch was an organised community 
with Prophets and teachers at its head. The writer 
of the Acts is taking a new departure in his history, 
and in full accordance with his declared intention 
in the opening of chapter i. he is now passing from ac \ i 
(Part I) the description of the witness 'both in 
Jerusalem and in all Judaea and Samaria' to 
(Part II) the account of the witness 'unto the end 


of the earth,' for which St Paul is the chosen vessel. 
Peter had hitherto been the leading figure in Part I, 
but alongside of him we have had mention of John, 
a full account of the ministry of Stephen, and its 
result, the conversion of Saul, and an inserted 'report' 
of the preaching of Philip at Samaria : after which 

Ac 1x32. we were taken back to Lydda, Joppa, and on to 

Ac xi 19. Caesarea ; then again back to Jerusalem. The 
Stephanie persecution led directly to Antioch be- 

Acxi26. coming a centre : 'the disciples were called Christians 
first in Antioch.' So strong a centre did it become 

Acxiso. that it was even able to send relief to Jerusalem 
itself, where the Church was suffering another crisis 
in the persecution of Herod Agrippa I. After 

Acxiiss. fulfilling their relief ministration Barnabas and Saul 
returned from^ Jerusalem to Antioch. 

'Whether we adopt Prof. Ramsay's explanation in St Paul the 
Traveller, p. 64, or not, the marginal reading of Westcott and Hort 
alone is correct as regards the sense. Westcott and Hort suggest 
(N.T. vol. ii Notes on Select Readings, p. 94) that the order of words 
in Acts xii 25, was originally tt\v els 'lep. irK-qpihffavTss SiaKovlav. 
Now it is very uncommon to find in N.T. this, arrangement, which 
became common after 100 A.D. in Christian writers, of placing the 
substantive last and splitting the composite object by the interposition 
of a participle or verb. St Luke's usual practice is the more ancient 
and less fanciful, but a remarkable confirmation of the exceptional 
practice is found in I Peter iv 2, rbv M\onrov iv crapKi ^lOxrai -xpbvov. 
In Philo this will often occur : cf. Quis Reruni div. Hares ad fin. 
0^770115 5^ T^v SKrjv dvairifnr\7]aL dLdvoiav, and e,^. also Apology of 
Aristides, xvi ^rts e/s ti]v oXdviov x^f-P^y^y^^ ^aaiKeiav. 


The Church in Antioch that IS. 


Now this change of the centre of gravity of the 
Church from Jerusalem to Antioch was fraught with 
momentous consequence. Its full meaning did not 
appear in 44 A.D., but it was clear enough at the time 
when Luke wrote the Acts, about 74 A.D. Jewish 
Christians of the forties — if I may use the expression 
— were beginning to see the danger of Antioch 
growing to be a separate church : this danger was 
that it would develop a separate character of its own, 
that it would not stick so close as of old to 'the 
teaching of the apostles and the fellowship and the 
breaking of the bread and the prayers,' that it would Aoii4». 
not insist so much as before on entrance by the door 
of circumcision, that it might throw open ' the door ac xiv 27. 
of faith' too wide, that the 'loosing' of the ancient 
ties would be more frequent than the 'binding' of 
new ones. In order to combat this danger, which 
was partly imaginary, and partly arose from the 
nature of the case, first 'Prophets came down from Ac xi 27. 
Jerusalem to Antioch,' and again 'certain people came 
down from Judaea and began teaching the brethren ' 
the necessity of circumcision 'by the custom ofAcxvi. 
Moses ' : the latter emissaries are probably those 
whom St Paul mentions as ' certain who came direct oai u 12. 
frorii James.' It would be affectation to deny that 
the course of events which ended in the Council acxv. 


of Jerusalem had been preceded and accompanied 
by a tension of feeling and a difference of opinion 
between the two schools of Jerusalem and Antioch. 

This point then is just where St. Luke is careful to 
shew that the Church in Antioch was not merely a 
school at variance with another school. It was the 
real nucleus of the Church which IS from everlasting, 
and so was that Church itself. Though in point of 
age a few years junior to the sister body at Jerusalem, 
it was by no means the result of a departure from its 
teaching. It broadened and deepened that teaching, 

5aU6. without departing from it. It did not ' preach another 
gospel.' At the head of it was the Prophet Joseph 
Barnabas, a good {i.e. kind) man, who had been before 
a pillar of the Jerusalem Church, for whose benefit he 
had sold his possessions. He could not but 're- 
member the rock from which he was hewn.' The 
Church of which he was a leader was essentially the 
same as the Church in Jerusalem, which was the Church 
of God in all the ages. It was about to ' lengthen 

s Hv 2. its cords and strengthen its stakes,' but it was not to 
be described as the Church that came into being 
(yei/OjueVi^i') at Antioch ; it was the Church which is, 
after the pattern of its Master whose watchword was, 

jnviiiss. I AM.i (See p. 2x6.) 

^ I cannot agree with Prof. Ramsay that tt/j- off(rai» iKK\ri<rlai> is almost 
equivalent to t^v dvoixa^oixhriv ' that was named,' or ' formed.' That it 
bears some special, not technical, sense, is true : but it is a mistake to 
class it along with Acts xiv 13, v 17, xxviii 17. In all these pas- 
sages the present participle of ei/ii is otiose and unnecessary and in 


The Prophets and Teachers at Antioch ; Lucius. 

The first series of Prophets and teachers at Antioch 

whom the author names is Barnabas, Symeon Niger, 

Lucius of Cyrene : the second series is Manaen, and 

Saul.^ We should very much like to know whether 

Lucius of Cyrene was Luke the author. The present 

writer is compelled to take the negative view, first 

because he does not think that the author would 

place himself in a higher series, whether in point of 

age or of rank, than he would place Saul. Secondly, 

whatever name he gave to Silas in this chapter, he 

would give him throughout the passage dealing with 

Antioch in those days, upon the assumption of the 

identity which the present treatise aims at proving. 

He mentions ' Silas ' in xv 22, 32. Thirdly, Silas is 

closely joined with Judas in xv 32, both being 

the best Greek would not be used. It only represents the copulative 
verb, which is already represented sufficiently by the definite article. In 
Acts XXV 2, it is omitted, and there is no difference of meaning what- 
ever between the expression there and in xxviii 17. On the other 
hand in Acts xiii i, there is no predicate ; the participle cannot stand 
for a copulative verb, and the expression is solemn and unique. The 
so-called ' circular ' usage of Eph i l is dealt with below. There is no 
parallel that I can find except perhaps in Eph i 1. The occasion of 
the statement was unique, and the phraseology is unique likewise. We 
may compare of course Ap i 4. 

iThe distinction made by P^e on Acts xiii i and Ramsay, St Paul 
the Traveller, p. 65 is a sound one, except that the latter indulges in 
the conjecture that the former series is one of Prophets, and the latter 
one of teachers. We know for a fact that Saul was a Prophet soon after 
this, if not now. 



Prophets : as there is no mention of Judas in xiii i, so 
it is to be expected that there will be no mention of 
Silas. The two in fact form a third series, but they 
were not so much associated with Antioch as with 
Jerusalem, as their proper centre at the first. 

The only other mention of a Lucius in the N.T. is 
in Rom xvi, where St Paul includes his salutation 
along with others. ' Timotheus my workfellow, and 
Lucius and Jason and Sosipater, my kinsmen,' that is, 
Jews. Why is the expression, ' kinsmen,' applied 
three times in this chapter to certain people when 
there are very few in all the names which are not 
those of Jews? The explanation is simply this. St 
Paul begins with Prisca and Aquila, who were Jews, 
and goes on with Epsenetus, who was probably a 
Jew, but this is doubtful. Next comes Maria,^ who, 
we may suppose, was not a full Jewess, though her 
name is Latin for Miriam. He then returns to 
Andronicus and Junia, who were full Jews, ' my kins- 
men,' therefore. Then follow others. Then come they 
of the familia or household of Aristobulus, who were 
not Jews. He resumes with Herodion a full Jew, ' my 
kinsman,' and continues with others. Again Timotheus 
who heads the list of those who send salutations, is 
only half a Jew ; but the others who follow, being full 
Jews, are called 'kinsmen.' St Paul was not by any 
means addressing the members of a family party of 
his own in Rome. And lastly, if he had meant by the 

1 The accusative case is Mapidc according to W. H., not Ma/jid/t. 



expression, as some suppose, his fellow-tribesmen of 
Benjamin, he would have used the word which he had 
previously used to the Thessalonians. We are tO'Thiii4. 
infer then that this Lucius was a Jew. Was Lucius 
of Cyrene a Jew ? There is nothing to shew that he 
was a Gentile proselyte. Had he been so, we should 
have been informed accordingly. It would have been 
indeed remarkable that in Antioch already there 
should be a Gentile Prophet or teacher. This was 
only a few years since the Crucifixion, and a very 
short time since the opening of Peter's eyes to the 
admission of the Gentiles through the door of faith. 
No Gentile could have been sufficiently proved in the 
faith for admission to the rank of a Prophet and 
teacher along with Barnabas. Had he been so re- 
cognised, the discussion at Jerusalem could not have 
taken place without reference to it, if at all. The 
ground would have been cut away. Causa finita 
esset. The burden of proof lies heavy upon those 
who would assert that any one of the Prophets and 
teachers at Antioch then was a Gentile. Until this 
is produced we must hold that Lucius of Cyrene was 
a Jew. And we may reasonably suppose that he is 
mentioned as the Cyrenian in order to distinguish 
him from the writer himself, who might be known by 
some as Lucius in his later days, when he came to 
write the Acts, though St Paul uses in the Epistles 
the shortest form of all, Lucas. The Lucius of Rom. 
xvi. may very well be Lucius of Cyrene of Acts xiii i. 


Apostles and Prophets. 

Before going further it is well that we should clear 
our minds of much that has been written about the 
names • Apostle ' and ' Prophet/ and note the mutual 
relations of the persons who bore them. There is 
one way, and one only, by which we can arrive at the 
meaning of these terms in the first century, and this 
is by studying the books written in that century and 
before it. The terms being of Greek origin, we shall 
of course examine the LXX which was in the hands 
of the first Christians. There, in the Greek O.T., 
they found the ancient history of their prophetic 
order. Nor was it so very ancient, for the latter part of 
the Book of Daniel was really only 200 years earlier 
than their own time ; though its true date was un- 
known to them. And these two centuries were 
bridged over by many apocryphal books.^ In all 
their own and their predecessors' literature, we can 
find here and there the origins of these terms with 
many others which they adopted. And there we 
must look. But it would be misleading to suppose 
that later generations, even in the second century, 
knew anything more than we do as to these origins. 
The writers were unscientific, and their imagination 
was only great enough to be mischievous. Their 
accuracy, too, was anything but trustworthy, as we 

' See The Christian Prophets, pp. 57-80. 


shall have occasion to see in the case even of so 
venerable a person as Justin Martyr (c. 150 A.D.). 
Consequently when Bishop Lightfoot quotes, for 
instance, Epiphanius^ on the name Apostle, he is 
quoting no authority as to the origin of the term as 
found in N.T. The remark requires to be made in order 
to guard against misapprehension. At the same time 
he remarks that the evidence, ' if somewhat vague in 
itself, is sufficient to discountenance the limitation of 
the Apostolate in the manner generally conceived.'^ 
This broad conclusion is valuable from one who has 
almost entirely disregarded the Prophets, like most 
other writers. When once the Prophets are under- 
stood, there is not a great difficulty in understanding 
what the Apostles were. 

The Prophets' function first of all was to search the 
Scriptures in order to find types of the Messiah and 
His kingdom, and to apply them to current events as 
their fulfilments, and then to declare the application. 
Instances of this will be given below. ^ But it is 
worth while to observe how the idea of prophecy as a 
living gift was fostered and fed. Some passages in 
Ecclesiasticus * have been quoted already, which 
shew that it was a living idea with the son of 
Sirach. A further instance occurs in the remark- 
able ' Prayer for Jerusalem ' where we read : ' Fill ecc1us_ 

^ •' xxxvi ; 

' Galatians, p 93, ed. 1880, ' On the name and office of an Apostle.' 

2 lb. p. 99. 

3 See Chap II, etc. * The Christian Prophets, p icx). 


Sion with the praise of thy virtue, and thy 
people with thy glory. Give testimony unto them 
whom thou hast possessed from the beginning, and 
raise up prophecies that rest upon thy name. Reward 
them that wait for thee, and let thy Prophets be found 
faithful in thee.' There seems to be an echo of this 
text in Luke's description of Anna speaking of Him to 

'k ii 38. all them that were waiting for Jerusalem's redemption. 

-kxxiiisi. Joseph of Arimathea was another who himself also 
was waiting for the kingdom of God. Can any one 
doubt that this passage was known and cherished by 

,kii2s. Symeon, the 'righteous and devout, who looked for 
the consolation of Israel ' ? It was one of the nearest 
and dearest to his heart. Dr. Sanday in his most 
able and accomplished article in Hastings' Dictionary 
of the Bible on 'Jesus Christ' has drawn attention to 
the character of those retired individuals, dwelling in 
the hill-country of Judaea especially, whose hearts 
were prepared for the coming of the Messiah, and 
who formed the nucleus of the Christian Church by 
becoming the first believers ; and he has pointed out 
their spiritual affinity with the ' poor in spirit ' of the 
Psalms of Solomon. A character and a disposition 
indeed is absolutely necessary to those who would 
receive Christ ; but Dr. Sanday has not named the 
class which studied to possess the character. The 
present writer ventures to think that ' Prophets ' is 
the class name which is required. Symeon was 'in 
Jerusalem,' and Anna 'departed not from the 



Temple, worshipping with fastings and supplications 
night and day.' What study was more in accordance 
with the highest teaching than the study of prophecy ? 
The son of Sirach had said again: 'But he that 
giveth his mind to the law of the Most High, and is 
occupied in the meditation thereof, will seek out the 
wisdom of all the ancient, and be occupied in EccIus 


prophecies. He will seek out the secrets of grave 
sentences, and be conversant in dark parables.' Such 
was the study of Symeon and of Anna. She was not 
one of the dwellers in the hill-country, but lived in 
the very centre of Jewish life. These are the Prophets 
of whom Luke the Prophet and the author of Acts 
and of 2 Peter, has heard, and for whom he finds a 
place in the early chapters of his first volume of 

Another passage which, though not exclusively 
prophetical, would feed the aspirations of the Pro- 
phetic circles, is Mai iii 16. 'Then they that feared 
the Lord spake often one to another : and the Lord 
hearkened and heard it, and a book of remembrance 
was written before him for them that feared the Lord, 
and that thought upon his name. And they shall be 
mine, saith the Lord of Hosts, in that day when I 
make up my jewels.' 

Another and not the least effective encourage- 
ment to the Prophets would be found in the famous 
verse of Daniel : ' Seventy weeks are determined Dan ix 24. 
upon thy people and upon thy holy city, to finish the 



transgression, and to naake an end of sins, and to 
make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in 
everlasting righteousness, and to seal up the vision 
and prophet (or prophecy), and to anoint the most 
Holy.' From which was to be inferred that even at 
the end of the seventy weeks, whenever that should 
be, there was to be at least a Prophet left in the 
Holy City, 

The Rules of the Prophets in Session. 

It was then well understood by every Prophet that 
he was not meant to hide his candle under a bushel, 
or hug his meditations and discoveries to himself 
either in the hill-country of Palestine or in the streets 
of a crowded city. The good news which came to 
him by the word of the Lord was meant to be made 
known abroad and proclaimed, as it were, upon the 
house-tops. Only there was always some danger 
that the individual Prophet might overstep the 
bounds of sane interpretation and err in applying the 
type to the current event, or in interpreting the text 
by recent history : he might seek and assert a fulfil- 
ment where there was none that commended itself to 
the other Prophets. In fact some criticism was 
necessary, and a gauntlet was required to be run. 
This criticism was found in the rule by which the 
Ap xxii 9. Prophet joined his ' fellow-servants the Prophets,' 

2 Jn 12. 

3jni4. 'spoke with them face to face,' 'mouth with 


mouth.' At this session he solemnly fell into a 
state of intense thought, Ecstasy, while collecting the 
materials of his utterance under the inspiration of the 
Holy Spirit. The Rules are found at length in i 
Cor xiv, ^ and just as St Paul follows the lines of an 
established Tradition in the doctrine of the Resur- 
rection which immediately follows in chapter xv, 

and follows ' the Law ' in the matter of women's i Cor xiv 


silence in the churches, and equally informs the 
Corinthian readers of what they knew or should have 
known beforehand in the matter of spiritual gifts i Cor xu 3, 
generally, so it is highly probable that the Rules of 
the Prophets in Session which he lays down for their 
observance were based upon rules already established. 
Only the disorderly state of the Corinthian Church, 
which contained relatively so many heathen 
elements, and was not sufficiently leavened with 
established Judaism, had made his clear declaration 

The Rules of the Prophets on Circuit. 

Corresponding with the written Rules of the 
Prophets in Session, we have still extant in writing 
some Rules of the Prophets on Circuit, and these are 
preserved for us in the ' Teaching of the Twelve 

1 The Christian Prophets, pp. 2, 242 ff. 


Apostles,' or rather ' The Teaching of the Lord 
through the Twelve Apostles to the Gentiles,' ^ and 
its place of origin appears to be Palestine or Syria. 
But, unfortunately, we cannot safely assign its date. 
It belongs to a time when Sunday was called ' the 
Lord's Day of the Lord.' But though we find the 
expression, 'the Lord's Day,' in Ap. i lo, we cannot 
be sure that it meant Sunday; nor can we be sure 
that the first three chapters of the Apocalypse are of 
the same date as the rest of that book. Therefore, 
we cannot venture to say that the Teaching is as 
early as before 70 A.D., so far as that expression 
:orxvi goes. But, again, it contains the 'Maran Atha, 
Amen,' which is a sign of very early date. Again 
the Apocalypse of the last things, with which 
it concludes, appears to be earlier in its origin than 
70 A.D. ; yet it is also possible that an early Apo- 
calypse was preserved in a document which itself 
substantially was later. Once more, the Love-feast 
still continues to be part of the Lord's Supper, or in 
other words the Eucharist immediately follows a 
meal. The words are : ' After ye are filled, give 
thanks as follows ' : (or ' celebrate the Eucharist as 
follows'). This implies that all the serious abuses 
;or xi i7ff. which St Paul had corrected for the Corinthians, and 
de 12. against which Jude protests in his Epistle, were still 
liable to occur so far as the deliberate Rules of the 
Teaching are concerned. Now this is one of the 

^ See The Christian Prophets, pp. 1 2 flf. 



strongest arguments possible against a date so late as 
Harnack's, 130-160 A.D. 

Leaving aside its Rules for the Eucharist, which 
are of the utmost interest, we now observe that 
the Teaching says : ' Concerning the Apostles and 
Prophets, so do ye according to the ordinance (^o'y/ua) 
of the gospel. Let every Apostle when he cometh to 
you, be received as the Lord ; but he shall not abide 
more than a single day, or if there be need, a second 
likewise ; but if he abide three days, he is a false 
Prophet' Now it is impossible that the term 
Apostle can here apply to the small body which we 
usually call by the name, the Twelve with St Paul 
and St Barnabas. None of these venerable persons 
could be conceived as outstaying his welcome in such 
a manner as to fall under the severe censure and 
reprobation of a false Prophet. Nor can any 
ingenuity maintain that the words imply any differ- 
ence whatever between an Apostle and a Prophet, as 
regards their status or character. Had the last words 
run . . . ' he is a false Apostle,' they would have 
meant just what they now mean. An Apostle is a 
Prophet, but he is just a Prophet on Circuit. 

The ' Teaching ' proceeds : ' And when he depart- 
eth, let the Apostle receive nothing save bread, until 
he findeth shelter ; but if he ask money, he is a false 
Prophet.' Nobody will assert that one of the Twelve 
Apostles was ever likely to be in need of shelter or 
money among those who might set him down as a 



false Prophet. But it is clear on the other hand that 
if there were many scores of Prophets going on 
circuit, the character of a true Prophet would need to 
be safe-guarded. And that was the case ; there were 
scores of Apostles. 'And any Prophet speaking in 
the spirit ye shall not try nor discern ; for every sin 
shall be forgiven but this sin shall not be forgiven.' 
So strongly does the Teaching maintain the teaching 
Corxiv of St Paul : 'And spirits of Prophets are subject to 
(the discernment or discrimination of) Prophets 
. (only) ' : and that of 2 Peter, ' No prophecy of 
scripture is liable to private solution "... for as it was 
uttered of old direct from God under the Holy Spirit, 
so now it can only be interpreted under the Holy 
Spirit of the Prophets. We note further that whereas 
' the Apostle ' was the term used in connection with 
the movements on Circuit, the term used of the same 
person when speaking or preaching is ' the Prophet.' 

There is no reason why we should consider, as 
some writers maintain, that the Teaching represents 
a curious and abnormal set of rules, accepted only 
by some outlying district in Egypt or elsewhere. So 
far from thrusting this valuable relic back into a 
corner, we ought to welcome it as a witness to what 
was the accepted code of the main current of the 
Christian Church for the greater part of the period 
40-75 A.D. 



Prophets and Apostles identical in O.T. 

We now look into the Old Testament and we find 
that Prophets and Apostles had been long ago 
associated together. The term ' Apostle ' occurs 
indeed but once in O.T., but then it is used by aiKixiv6. 
Prophet of himself. Ahijah says to Jeroboam's wife : 
' I am a hard Apostle to thee ' (lxx). But the term 
Apostle is only the verbal substantive of (aTroo-TeXXw) 
' to send forth ' in Greek, and we find this verb again 
and again used of sending forth a Prophet. Thus : 
' the Lord sent forth a prophet unto . the children of Jud vi s. 
Israel.' 'And the king sent forth with him . . .iKii44. 
Nathan the prophet.' ' And he sent forth unto them 2 chr xxiv 
Prophets.' ' And he sent forth unto Amaziah Pro- = chr xxv 
phets.' ' And I sent forth unto you all my servants the 
Prophets.' ' I was not sending forth the Prophets, yet jer vii 25. 
they ran.' 'And I was sending forth unto you myjerxxm2i 
servants the Prophets, rising early and sending.' jer xxv 4. 
' The words which the Lord sent forth by the Spirit in jer xiiv 4. 
the hand of the Prophets.' ' Behold, I send forth my zechviiiz. 
messenger,' who is generally recognised as a Prophet. M^xi'gf 
Another passage is this : ' The Lord God of their 
fathers sent (e^a-TrecrreiXev) to them by his messengers, 
rising up betimes and sending (aTroa-reWwv) ; because zChrxxxv 
he had compassion on his people and on his dwelling 
place : But they mocked the messengers of God, and 
despised his words, and scoffed at his prophets! These 


passages prove the identity of an Apostle with a 
Prophet sent on a message in O.T. 

Prophets and Apostles identical in N.T. 

But exactly the same amount of identity between 
Apostle and Prophet meets us throughout the N.T. 

Lk'xUg.^'*' ' Behold I send forth unto you (Scribes and Pharisees) 
Prophets and Apostles ' (Luke), (' and wise men and 
scribes,' Mt). 'He calleth unto him the twelve' — 

Mkvi7. He has just been speaking of Himself as a Prophet 
who is only dishonoured in his own country — ' and 
began to send them forth two and two ' : after being 
thus sent forth they were Apostles, and have always 
been so called. And one immediate effect of his 
sending forth the Apostles is that he is said by the 

Mk vi 15. people to be ' a Prophet as one of the Prophets,' that 

2 Ki ii 3-7. is to say, He did as one of the Prophets of old were 
supposed to have done and ordained his successors to 
multiply His teaching. That Jesus recognised Him- 
self as a Prophet is clear from the many passages in 

Mkix37. which He says the Father sent Him forth; but as 

Jn V 36, 38. 

jnvi29,57. sent forth by the Father he is an Apostle, and He is 

Hebm'i spoken of as such in the Epistle to the Hebrews, 'the 

cf^Acm Apostle and High Priest of our confession,' where 

we observe that the term Apostle distinctly means a 

Prophet, because He is immediately compared with 

Moses, the first and greatest of the Prophets. Jesus 


is the head and culmination alike of the Prophetic 
and of the Priestly order, and this is the point of the 
passage. Again, the parable of the husbandmen of Mkxiizff. 
the vineyard clearly implies the sending forth of 
Prophets who are appropriately called 'servants, slaves,' 
the regular term by which they called themselves^ acvH 35. 
after Moses, in contrast to 'husbandmen.' The 
seventy disciples are sent forth equally with theLkxi, 3. 
twelve, though with a different purpose. 

After the Lord's death the Apostles sent forth Ac viii 14. 
Peter and John to the Samaritans. Ananias of Ac ix 17. 
Damascus recognises that the Lord had sent him 
forth to find Saul. In the Epistle of the Apostles 
and Elders, Brethren, of Jerusalem we read: 'WeAcxv^?. 
have sent forth Judas and Silas' : now we know that 
these two were ' prophets also themselves.' St. Paul ac xv 32, 
the prophet ' sent forth two of them that ministered acxIx 22. 
unto him, Timothy and Erastus, into Macedonia,' as 
later he sent forth Tychicus to Ephesus. In fact it 2 Tim iv 12. 
was possible for an Apostle to be such relatively to a i cor ix 2. 
certain church, and not to all; as St. Paul was to the 
Corinthians, but not to all, for instance, not to the Cai ii 7. 

' . Phil 1125. 

Jews in every case — for he had been entrusted with 

the gospel of the uncircumcision — and as Epaphrodi- 

tus was sent forth by St. Paul to the Philippians. In 2Corviii2; 

short, each one who was sent forth on a mission of the 

Gospel, including Jesus Himself, was so far forth an 

Apostle : that is purely a grammatical necessity, for 

1 The Christian Prophets, p. 104. 


grammar makes the word Apostle the verbal substan- 
tive of the Greek word ' to send forth.' If the mission 
was often repeated, the person so sent would un- 
doubtedly become entitled to the name Apostle. 
That every Apostle was also a Prophet, without ex- 
ception, is a statement which has the highest degree 
of probability ; for the special errands on which simple 
messengers were sent forth would probably not be 
repeated, and thus the title Apostle would not attach 
permanently to simple messengers, as it would attach 
to Prophets. 

The above remarks point to the conclusion that a 
Prophet on his circuit was an Apostle. It has been 
shewn elsewhere that Elders ^ were Prophets, and 
Prophets were Elders, in N.T. times. And it cannot 
be denied that Elders were frequently Apostles. 

And we may conclude this chapter with some 
weighty remarks on Apostolical Succession by Light- 
foot,^ as follows : ' The functions of the Apostle and 
the bishop differ widely. ... It is not, therefore, to 
the Apostle that we must look for the prototype of 
the bishop. . . . The succession at least does not 
consist in an identity of office.' 

^ The Christian. Prophets, pp. 17S, 199) 238. 

^ Philippians, ed. 1879, "The Christian Ministry," p. 196. 



We now proceed to examine the Silas passages, and 
along with them we have to consider what Harnack 
has called the most trustworthy document of the 
Acts. The statement assumes that there are some 
documents which are not very trustworthy. If there 
are such, by all means let us ascertain which they 
are. At present he would be a bold critic who 
ventured to arrange the paragraphs of the Acts in 
order of merit as trustworthy and historical. It is 
desirable to commence our investigations by re- 
quiring as few assumptions as possible, and therefore 
it should here be observed that the passages of Acts 
described in the first person plural are not to be 
classed as a Journey-record or a We-document except 
for convenience of name. It would be misleading to 
compare, for instance, the We-document with the 
letter of Claudius Lysias, which definitely purports 
to be a foreign document embedded in the history. 


The We-document does not purport to be a foreign 
document: the onus of proof lies upon those who 
maintain that it is such. It is fairer to start with an 
open mind upon the question of its authorship, and 
to allow that it may possibly be by the author of the 
book. It is fairer to start with an open mind as to 
its unity as a document, and to allow that it may be 
a series of diary notes. Further still, the same 
remark applies to its nature : let us not assume that 
it is even a Travel-document : it may be a home- 
document. Meanwhile, for convenience, and for no 
other reason, the term used here is ' We-document.' 

If xiv 22 is not a first trace of it, — and we shall see 
later that there is a still earlier trace — it begins at 
xvi lo and continues to xvi 17 : it resumes at xx 5, 
and continues to 15, and almost certainly to xxi 18: 
it resumes at xxvii 2 and continues to xxviii 16. 
Professor Ramsay^ has thus put the question which 
most recent writers are anxious to solve : 

" What is the relation between the ' Travel-docu- 
ment' and the completed text of the Acts f " To this 
the answer must be that the ' Travel-document ' was 
Luke's own written notes supplemented by memory, 
and the education of further experience and reading 
and research." " His diary, . . . and his notes of 
conversation (s) . . . were worked into the book." . . 
" He added ^ . . an obvious acquaintance with Paul's 

^ Si Paul the Traveller, p. 384. 

'•^ lb. p. 385. See however Harnack's remark quoted below, chapter x. 


own letters." " We shall ^ argue that ... the author 
did not live to put the final touches to his second 
book (the Acts)." 

Now we shall bear in mind that the Acts tells us that 
" Silas was a Prophet himself," as also was St Paul, ac xv 32. 
What sort of men the Prophets were, I have en- 
deavoured to indicate in another volume.^ If I may 
be allowed to refer the reader to it he will there see 
that the Prophets after going on Circuit, or as we say 
on Missionary journeys — in which case they were 
called Apostles, so that Barnabas was an Apostle as acxIv 14. 
well as St Paul — brought home their accounts^ or 
reports (^t^y/^trety, 'descriptions'). It would be too 
much to say that we have evidence to shew that 
these accounts were always drawn up in writing. 
Yet when we read how those who 'had sent forth the 
Apostles' solemnly 'handing them over the grace of Ac xv 23. 

Ac xvii 14. 

God,' joyfully welcomed them on their return, andAcxivae. 
listened to their oral announcement of ' God's doings Ac xxi 17. 

Ac xiv 27. 

in conjunction with them,' it is impossible to refrain 
from two inferences : first, that a missionary journey 
of months and even years in duration could not be 
fully described unless notes in diary form had been 
taken at the time; and secondly, that certain inci- 
dents would often be preserved in writing after the 
account was delivered, if they had not been already 

1^/ Paul the Traveller, p. 23. '^The Christian Prophets, p. 59. 

^ The Christian Prophets, p. 175. For the other Rules of the 
Prophets on Circuit see the same volume p. 13. 


written. St Luke's own written Gospel was at any 
rate of the nature of those accounts, any one of which 
Lkii.4. is called by him a ' description ' (Scnyrjo-iv). 

TJie object of the Prophetic Accounts: Fulfilment of 

It has been shewn in chapter i and elsewhere in 
connexion with the Prophetic Apocalypse, that the 
Christian Prophets made it their unceasing care and 
business to interpret the Scriptures of the O.T. in 
the light of recent events of which they were eye- 
witnesses. Their subject-matter was ancient prophecy: 
their production was Christian Prophecy. It is an 
exaggeration to assert that a Prophet never spoke in 
Session except when he had an Apocalypse. Nor 
need we suppose that when, for instance, a Prophet 
returned from his Circuit and was to deliver his 
report, he would first fall into a state of ecstasy. We 
may rather suppose that he would first exert his 
powers of memory, aided by diary notes, and after- 
wards the ecstasy might follow. This state was one 
of intense thought, in which the attention was 
fastened upon a text or passage, and its application 
to recent events. The object was to verify an in- 
stance of fulfilment of prophecy. This is why the 
usual word, ' fulfilled/ is used in Luke i i. To our 
minds it is natural to say ' an event occurs,' ' matters 


or things have resulted or taken place ' : it is unusual 
and unnatural to say ' things have been fulfilled.' 
But it was quite usual and natural for the Christian 
Prophets to say that ' matters (of prophecy) have 
been fulfilled^ or filled full of meaning, or fully estab- 
lished. This was what they looked for every day 
and every hour. Commentators have erred here just 
because they failed to take the standpoint of a 
Prophet which St Luke's certainly^ was. Bp. Words- 
worth, for instance, thought that the idea was that of 
a wind filling the sails of a ship ! But what has a 
ship in full sail to do with the author, the subject, or 
the narration 1 From this failure of historical im- 
agination arose, as was natural, any number of 
patristic fancies embellishing the page of the com- 
mentator who allowed his unhistorical imagination 
to run wild. And hence too would arise on the other 
side many a railing accusation against the literary 
style of St Luke, who, however good and sensible as 
a man, must, forsooth, be so affected and silly a 
writer as to adorn his history with the purple patch ^ 
which he fished up on one of his voyages in company 
with St Paul. Such misunderstanding is unprofit- 
able. And therefore by all means let us deal with 

1 That the We-author was once a Jew is plain from his expression in 
xxvii. 9, 'the fast (Day of Atonement) was already past.' None but a 
Jew would use this expression, pace Prof. Ramsay. 

- Purpureus, late qui splendeat, unus et alter 
Adsuitur pannus. — Hor. A. P. 15. 


the author on the assumption that he possesses the 
elementary quality of common sense ; that he writes, 
as every one does, from his point of view,i which 
need not be a narrow or selfish one ; and that he 
means what he says. 2 

1 That Luke (i.e. the author of the Acts with or without the We- 
passages) was a Jew, follows from the strong Jewish texture of all the 
thoughts in Acts generally, not only in i-xii. It would fairly be 
presumed until challenged, and until the challenge were made good. 
The commonest argument for his being a Gentile is that in Col iv 14 
he is mentioned with Demas, and after Epaphras, who are all men- 
tioned after 'them of the circumcision,' namely Aristarchus, Mark, and 
Jesus Justus. I do not feel the force of this reasoning. Surely no one 
would say that if St Paul were speaking of himself he would put him- 
self in the list of 'those of the circumcision.' Yet no critic has yet 
been found to maintain that St Paul was uncircumcised. Analogy 
compels us to hold that neither would he put his close friend, his 
alter ego, ' the beloved healer Luke,' in the same list, if he, like Paul, 
was a circumcised Jew. If then, we are led to conclude that Luke is 
Silas, one result will be that the argument from Col iv 14 that Luke 
was a Gentile will break down, resting as it does upon a hasty inference 
from words imperfectly considered. The most recent English com- 
mentator on St Luke's Gospel, Dr. A. Plummer, Edinburgh, 1900, 
p. xix says : ' That he was originally a heathen may be regarded as 
certain.' He advances no proof of this assertion, but adds later : ' The 
attempt to shew that [he] is a Jew is a failure.' This style of criticism 
is somewhat too positive. Dr. Plummer still admits : ' Whether he 
was a Jewish proselyte before he was a Christian must remain un- 
certain ' ! This is quite enough for the purpose of the present treatise. 
I only ask for an open mind on the part of the reader, though I am 
convinced, as the result of my enquiries, that Luke was a Jew. As to 
the inference by Sanday and Headlam, Comm. on Rom. Int. xxxiv, 
that Greek names of ' brethren ' at Rome imply a non-Jewish origin of 
the bearers, it is quite unsafe : see Chapter i above. Was there ever a 
more Gentile sounding name than Aristarchus ? Yet he was ' of the 

^Alford again has failed in the same way when he adheres to the 
A.V. in its colourless translation 'certainly believed.' 



Does any prophetic object appear in the We-document f 

We shall now examine the We-passages in order 
to see whether they shew traces of being prophetical 

Acts xiv 21, 22. 'And when they had preached Acx;r2i,2a. 
the gospel to that city, and had made many disciples, 
they returned to Lystra, and to Iconium, and to 
Antioch, confirming the souls of the disciples, ex- 
horting them to continue in the faith, and that 
through many tribulations we must enter into the 
kingdom of God.' The present writer has dealt 
with this passage elsewhere^ in connexion with 
Barnabas, and has inferred that it contains the 
essential and elementary teaching of the Christian 
Prophets of that time, of whom Barnabas, as his 
name betokens, was a conspicuous instance and an 
important leader. The question before us now con- 
cerns the expression ' we must.' Are we to say that 
' we must ' is part of the We-document, or not .'' If 
not, whom does the ' we ' include ? If it denotes the 
Christians, then it is noteworthy as finding more 
parallels in the two Epistles of Peter than in the 
Acts or the Gospel of St Luke. Another natural 
explanation is that it includes the speaker, and 
those to whom he had spoken in Galatia. But, 
if so, it may perhaps be an abstract Report 

^ The Christian Prophets, p. 6o. 


of his preaching there, a Diegesis, a summary 
Account. In fact the Author of the Acts may here 
have incorporated in his Book a small piece of a 
prophetic Account, which he had heard delivered 
at Antioch in Syria by Barnabas on his return to 
the Prophets who him sent forth with Paul. If 
so, how much more likely he would be to incorporate 
in other passages some notes of a prophetic Account 
which was his own, taken from the pages of his own 
diary ? 

The preaching of Apostles governed by prophetic 

Acts xvi, 9 to 1 8. First, we observe that the 
We-document is so entirely bound up with the con- 
text that it is difficult to say exactly where it begins 
and where it ends. It may begin at verse 9 or at 
verse 10; it may end at 17 or at 18. The style 
is, so far as one can judge, absolutely the same as 
that of the context ; the grammatical person of the 
narrator alone is different. But, what is stranger 
still, we observe that the We-document takes us 
into the middle of the story of the Pythoness, to 
the point where St Paul solemnly commands the 
spirit in the name of Jesus Christ to come out of 
her, 'and it came out,' and then ceases. The sequel 
is not in the first person of the We-document, and 



it begins, ' And when her masters saw . . .' after 
which follows the action which led to the incidents 
of the imprisonment. It is quite clear that what- 
ever source the We-document proceeds from, it is 
not more detailed, nor more graphic, nor more 
elaborate in style, than the context which follows 
it. No difference in style can be discovered at all.^ 
Now we come to more important and also more 
debateable ground, for treading which we must use 
what support we can find, besides remembering that 
if the passage is by a Prophet, his standpoint will 
be strange to us, and his ideas will seem at first 
far-fetched. And, first, it must be allowed that 
there are some points in the narrative which are 
unusually puzzling to all commentators. _ If the 
solution of these puzzles can be discovered by 
means of light thrown upon them from the side of 
Christian Prophecy, then the latter will begin to 

' Schmiedel, Art. Acts, Encyclopcedia Biblica, p 44, says : ' If we 
are to regard the We-record as coming from Silas, the author of 
Acts must have used it without the we, and in a. very fragmentary 
way indeed, for long periods during which, according to his own 
statement (xv 40, etc.) Silas was with Paul. This, though not quite 
impossible, is very unlikely.' Now this, I contend, is just what he 
has done. It was, antecedently, very unlikely that any writer should, 
for any reason at all, use we in passages of half a dozen chapters of a 
history written otherwise in the third person. Yet here is a writer who 
has done the unlikely thing. No convincing reason has been dis- 
covered for it yet. The present treatise finds an intelligible reason in 
the assumption that Luke is Silas, and it is more intelligible still if 
we suppose the Acts to be Part ii of a work in three Parts. See below, 
chapter x, and p. 80. 


command the attention which it deserves, and which 
it has never yet received. The chief difficulties are : 

1. "The spirit of Jesus" (WH, R.V.) in verse 7, 
which is next before the We-document ; 

2. The terms apphed to Philippi, "which is (or, 
inasmuch as it is) a first city of the portion of Mace- 
donia, a colony," 

3. " Where we supposed, or we were thinking, there 
was a place of prayer.'' 

Professor Ramsay, who has done so much in 
recent years to elucidate the Acts of the Apostles, 
especially upon the geographical and political sides 
of that unique history, has recently enforced his 
remarks in The Church in the Roman Empire by a 
paper ^ on "St Paul the Statesman.'' The following 
pages tend to confirm and carry further his main 
idea, clear and suggestive and convincing as it is, 
and to shew that while St Paul was a statesman 
and a patriot he was first of all a Prophet, and 
that his prophetic office had made him both states- 
man and patriot. 

In the course of his 'Second Missionary Journey' 

I This. St Paul writes to the Thessalonians that his gospel 
came unto them not in word only but in power 
and in the Holy Spirit and in much fulfilment. 
This last is a unique expression, and the occasion 
of it was unique. The function of the Prophets 

; Pet i 10. was, in the words of Peter,^ to "seek out and to 

ilnthe Contemporary Review, 1901. ^ See Chapter iv. 


search out diligently what time, or (failing that) 
what manner of time, the Spirit of Christ, which 
was (from time immemorial) in them (as a historic 
body) was making clear." The Christian Prophets 
searched the Scriptures in order to find fulfilment. 
Their prophetic spirit indeed "searched all things, 
yea, the deep things of God," and " unto them did ' Cor u 10. 
God make revelation through the (prophetic) spirit." 
Their function was, in other words, to find a corre- 
spondence between a written text or texts of Old 
Testament or Apocryphal Scripture on the one hand 
and a current event on the other, and to declare 
the fulfilment, and to build their teaching upon it. 
Now let us endeavour to place ourselves in the 
position of the two Prophets, Paul and Silas, when 
they were at Troas in this ' Second Missionary 
Journey.' In front of them lay the Aegaean Sea, with 
its mountainous islands of Imbros and Samothrace, 
beyond which lay the Promised Land of Europe, 
to be made ere long the possession of Christ ; and in 
their hands was a guide-book, the Book of Joshua in 
Greek. But why call it the Book of Joshua.? To 
them, as to all readers of the Septuagint, it was the 
Book of Jesus. That is its one and only Greek 
name. The order of the books was : — Deuteronomy, 
Jesus, Judges. And so, if there was one book of the 
Old Testament which must convey to the Christian 
Prophets their prophetic spiritual guidance in " things 
which were to be fulfilled among them," it was the 


Book of Jesus. Consequently when we read that 
the two Prophets Paul and Silas had been " for- 
bidden by the Spirit of Jesus to go into Bithynia" 
we know what that expression means. " The Spirit 

Acxvi?. of Christ" is not the same as "the Spirit of Jesus,'' 
for this is the spirit of Jesus of Nazareth as typified 
by that of Jesus son of Naue (LXX for Nun). The 
Spirit of Jesus inspired them to find their guidance in 
the Book of Jesus. 'Christ' in i Pet. and elsewhere 
denotes a dream, a hope, an idea, Messiah, who 
differed as he was imagined in the mind of this 
Prophet and of that. But ' Jesus ' denotes a historical 
person. And so they were led by the Spirit of Jesus 
in the course of this memorable journey to descend 
from the mountains of Mysia to the coast of Troas. 

Here took place the next fulfilment. I do not say 
the first, for we shall find that there had been pre- 
vious fulfilments. Prof. Ramsay has suggested that 
" the man of Macedonia who stood and besought 
Paul in a vision of the night at Troas" was 
none other than Luke himself The suggestion — I 
gather from friends of mine — has commended itself 
to many readers. But without considering it to be 
" moonstruck fancy,'' to use the Professor's term, — 
he claims no more for it than conjecture, — I think 
it will prove untenable. For there is one passage 
in the Bible where the expression occurs, '' Come 
over and help us" and it is in the Book of Jesus, 

Josh X 6. where "the men of Gibeon sent unto Joshua to the 


camp of Gilgal, saying, " Come up to us quickly and 
help us." The rest of the vision originates or is 
suggested in the preceding chapter of Jesus, where 
the captain of the Lord's host came beside him : 
"Behold, there stood a man before him, and hisjoshvis. 
sword drawn in his hand." The two thoughts are 
blended, as thoughts which have passed in the day 
are so often blended, in the one vision of the night. 
Thus was the conviction of the two Prophets con- 

But where was the Lord's host.' It was not yet; 
albeit the holy angels were with them. They were 
themselves but the pioneers of conquest ; they 
were the two spies sent by Jesus Son of Naue to spy 
out the land and Jericho. Jesus is the conqueror 
about to occupy the promised Land of Europe. 
And here before them was their Jordan, the North- 
east corner of the Aegaean Sea. Perhaps they 
knew how the Rabbis said that " the breadth of 
the waters divided in Jordan was twelve miles "^ 
But the waters of their present Jordan were on a 
scale ten times as large; and as the Jordan did 
not divide for the spies to pass over them, neither 
did they expect their Jordan to divide for them. 

We pass to another of the passages mentioned 
above, — one which has hitherto, I think, never 
received a satisfactory solution. What is the mean- 
ing of Philippi being called (the) "first city of the 

■'John Lightfoot on Acts i 12, quoting Kimchi upon Josh iii 16. 


portion ^ Macedonia, a colony " ? Hort wrote ^ about 
twenty years ago : " Mep/y, portion, never denotes 
simply a region, province, or any geographical 
division : when used of land or of anything else it 
means a portion or share, i.e. a part in a relative 
sense only, not absolutely" {fxepoi). The whole 
note should be read. He adds : " It is not im- 
possible that fxepiSo^ should be read as JliepiSo^," 
i.e. "the first city of Pierian Macedonia, a colon3^" 
but acknowledges that the conjecture " Pierian " 
has no support and is unlikely. Ramsay trans- 
lates first of its district, and so does R.V., but 
there is no authority whatever for such a meanings 
The idea of a portion is quite distinct from that 
of a district, however cognate it may appear at 
first sight. Blass translates of the Prima district of 
Macedonia. The translation is tame and pointless, 
for Luke is not a writer on political geography. 
When he says Philippi is a colony, there is much 
point in the remark, for it explains the positions of 
the various officers mentioned in the story, and of 
Paul and Silas as Roman citizens in relation to 
them. In fact Luke confines himself to what is 
necessary for the reader's understanding. More- 
over Blass has had to alter the reading by the 
conjecture TrptaTijs for Trpurrri. The only true trans- 
lation of the words is first of the portion Macedonia, 

1 Me/)is occurs frequently in LXX for p7D portion. 
' Xotes on SeUct Readings. 


a colony. It is not a true translation to say of the 
portion of Macedonia, for that would require a 
second r^y before Ma/ce^ow'ay, and there is none. 

Although Hort says the reading must remain for 
the present in doubt, he has shown the weakness of 
Ramsay's and Blass's translations here, and of all 
others which rest upon a supposed geographical 
meaning of yuep/?, portion. I venture to think that 
the text he has given us is sound, and indeed, as 
regards the one word fxepiSoi, the testimony in favour 
of its genuineness is overwhelming. Nor is the 
meaning of fieplSos, portion, open to any more doubt 
than the reading, pace Prof. Ramsay. Nor is the 
explanation of it more difficult than the reading 
when once we have the clue in the Book of Jesus. 

Now Jesus said: "How long are ye slack to gojoshxviiie 
to possess the land .' Give out of yourselves three 
men ^ from a tribe, and let them arise and go through 
the land and describe it before me. . . . And ye 
shall describe the land into seven portions. . . . 
The Levites have no portion among you." Again, 
we have: "The portion of the sons of Judah wasjoshxixg. 
made greater than theirs." What then can be 
plainer than the idea which was in the mind of 
the Prophet who wrote the Acts.' He saw that 
the two Prophets had divided the Roman Empire 
into (may we say seven ?) portions, one of which 

' The number three is made up in \he fulfilment by counting Timothy 
along with the two Prophets, Paul and Silas-Luke, Silas being Luke. 


was " the portion Macedonia," and all of which were 
prepared by God in the Promised Land, the new 
inheritance of His people which He instructed Jesus 
of Nazareth, as He had instructed Jesus son of 
Naue, to allot to the tribes of Israel. 

When then the lots were cast in Selo (Shiloh) 
before the Lord, the first to come up was the 
tribe of Benjamin. This of course was St Paul's 
tribe, and he accepted Macedonia as the inheri- 
tance of the Lord, in fulfilment of that allotment 
by Jesus. 

But why was Philippi tlie first city of the portion 
Macedonia } Neapolis was where they set foot upon 
Europe. All that we know is that no particular 
fulfilment is connected with Neapolis. The fulfil- 
ments began in full at Philippi. Neapolis was the 
first city of Europe in order of time at which they 
touched ; but Philippi was the first city of the 
portion. Philippi was their Jericho. We shall see 
further the truth of St Paul's remark to the Thes- 
salonians, how "the gospel came to them at first,'' 
and also to the Philippians, " in much fulfilment.'' 

The capture of Jericho took place on the seventh 

day of solemn compassing. In Philippi Paul and 

Silas had sojourned certain days, till on the Sabbath 

Acxvi. 13. day "we went outside the gate," and the crowning 

incident occurred. 
Hebxisi. The type of faith amidst unbelief was Rahab ; 
the anti-type at Philippi was Lydia, who said : 


" If ye have judged me to be faithful to the Lord, 
come into my house and abide there." 

Not only was Rahab saved when Jericho was 
taken, but " all her house " ; so were the " house " of 
Lydia baptized. 

The token of Rahab's house was a line of scarlet 
thread: the house of Lydia too had its stock ofAcxviM. 
Thyatiran purple. With Clement, who devotes a cor i 12. 
paragraph to Rahab, the scarlet thread is a type 
of the blood of the Lord, and he shows how " not Heb xi 31. 
only faith but prophecy is found in the woman." 

Jericho was "straitly shut up and made fast with 
bars (LXX) : none went out and none came in." 
This is fulfilled in the prison at Philippi. 

The shattering of the wall of Jericho, which fell 
down flat, is fulfilled in the earthquake at Philippi. 

And a subsidiary fulfilment is to be discerned in 
the manner of the city's fall. For " when the people josh vi 20. 
heard the trumpets, all the people shouted together 
with a great and strong shout. And all the wall 
fell around." And so we read in Acts : " Paul and 
Silas were singing hymns to God, and the prisoners 
were listening to them, and suddenly a great earth- 
quake took place. . . ." The great shout was fulfilled 
in the hymns ; the hearing of the people in the 
listening of the prisoners ; the simultaneous fall of 
the walls in the simultaneous opening of the prison 

There is however one part of the occurrence at 


Philippi, in fact the central incident of the ven- 
triloquist girl, which has no parallel in the Book, 
of Jesus. This girl who had " a spirit, a Python," 
and who is commonly known as a Pythoness, was 
in fact a ventriloquist. Plutarch, who was living in 
St Paul's time, tells us distinctly that ' Python ' 
(feminine Pythoness) was in his time the modern 
name for a ventriloquist. Now the witch of Endor 
was called by the LXX a ventriloquist. And we 
naturally look in i Samuel xxviii to find some 
resemblance to the narrative in Acts xvi. Nor 
are we disappointed. Paul the Prophet was entitled 
to find some fulfilments in the book which records 
the saying about his fellow Benjamite : " Is Saul 
also among the prophets .'' " In this particular 
chapter however we first observe that the " witch " 
constrained {irape^iaa-aTo) Saul to eat when there 
was no strength in him, whereas at Philippi it was 
not the Pythoness, but Lydia, who " constrained 
them to enter her house and abide there." The 
verb in Greek is the same in both cases : in the 
New Testament it only occurs in Luke xxiv 29 
and here : in the Old Testament half a dozen times. 
If this threefold fulfilment is not enough to satisfy 
all doubts, there is a further coincidence which 
does. The " witch " said unto Saul : " Behold now 
thy handmaid heareth thy voice, and I place my 
life in my hand, and I hear the words which thou 
speakest unto me." Of Lydia We read in Acts : 


" She heard, whose heart the Lord had opened to 
give heed to the things that were spoken by Paul." 

It remains for us to observe the remarkable ful- 
filment of names of localities mentioned in the 
Book of Jesus, which is to be discerned in the 
record of Acts in dealing with this Macedonian 

We have already explained two difficulties of the 
three which have hitherto puzzled the commentators 
in the narrative of Acts xvi. The first is the 
meaning of the spirit of Jesus. The second — which 
indeed has bafHed them — is first of the portion 
Macedonia, as applied to Philippi, and the third 
remains. What is the meaning of the words, 
' where we supposed,' or were thinking, ' that a ao xvi 13 
place of prayer was.' This is Westcott and Hort's 
reading, and has the best testimony. The Sinaitic 
MS. does indeed give us a remarkable variant, 
'where he supposed,' presumably meaning Paul. 
The Western recension gives us, ' where it seemed 
(likely).' Blass has conjectured, by a change of 
one letter, 'where they were wont to be engaged 
in prayer.' But this is pure conjecture, and testifies 
to the difficulty of the readirig, ' where we supposed,' 
rather than to its unsoundness: the MSS. should 
not be given up if we find a reasonable sense in 
what they say. 

And I think we can find the sense in accordance 
with the observations already given, and in accord- 


ance with the prophetic ideas which especially at 
this time ruled the minds of Paul and Silas. 
We have seen that they were finding 'much fulfil- 
ment ' in their visit to Macedonia, and that they did 
not, and could not, hesitate to take a text of O.T., 
especially the Book of Jesus, upon its own merits 
and apart from its context. Possessed of the con- 
viction that Philippi was their Jericho, first city of 
the Portion of Benjamin, although the complete 
fulfilment had not yet been vouchsafed to them, 
there was one place which they naturally sought to 
identify, and this was Gilgal on the banks of the 
Jordan. They proceeded in their journey, as the 
writer of the Acts is careful to tell us, a-vjUL^i^d^ovres, 
putting one and one together, and so 'concluding' 
that the spirit of Jesus was still with them. It may 
be thought that Gilgal, and Jericho too, should have 
been at Neapolis, for the Jordan was the corner 
of the Aegean Sea which they had already crossed. 
However, it had not proved to be so, and they 
might well fe thinking that, as their Jordan was 
wider, by ten times, than even the Rabbinic Jordan, 
twelve miles in width, so their Gilgal might be on 
the same scale some eight miles further on, near 
Philippi, which was their Jericho. 

Now they had before their eyes the words in 

joshvgf the LXX of Joshua: 'And the Lord said to Jesus 

son of Naue, To-day I take away the reproach of 

Egypt from you. And he called the name of that 



place Galgala. And the sons of Israel made the 
passover on the 14th day of the month at evening, 
on the west of Jericho beyond Jordan in the plain.' 
When, then, they found on arriving at Philippi that 
the Gangas, otherwise called Gangites,^ was the 
river of Philippi, to the west of it, it is natural to 
understand how they were thinking that hard by its 
stream, approached by the Arch commemorating the 
Battle of Philippi, they would find the place of prayer. 
The great Via Egnatia, that artery of the Roman 
Empire which joined Rome with Byzantium, is lined 
near the Arch with rows of tombs. In that outskirt 
of the Roman Colony the small Jewish community 
was compelled to find its place of prayer.^ 

Let us now pass beyond the neighbourhood of 
Philippi, looking forth toward the western side of the 
portion Macedonia. It is not necessary to make the 
reasonable supposition that the two Prophets 
guided by the spirit of Jesus on arriving at Neapolis, 
or before, had gotten them a map or itinerary of 
the country in which they were wayfaring strangers. 
If a map were not allowed by the earliest prpphetic 
Rule to those who might not take purse or scrip 
or shoes, then they must depend on the oral pro- 
nunciation of the names of places in the country 

'See Lightfoot, Philippians, p. 52, ed. 1 879, though he sees no 
prophetic clue. Yet Gangas and Galgala sound almost the same. 

" See the admirable work of T. Lewin, Life and Epistles of St Paul, 
for the topography of Philippi. 



they were to visit, and when these were pronounced 
by foreign lips, there was much room for doubt as 
to the spelling and there would be a proportionate 
freedom in identifying the Macedonian name in 
its uncouth pronunciation with the odd Greek 
names of small and obscure Hebrew localities 
recorded in the book of Jesus as belonging to the 
portion of Benjamin. Probably the earliest prophetic 
Rule had been relaxed by this time in view of 
longer journeys for the Prophets. In any case the 
modern reader who will take a map in the one 
hand and a Bible in the other, will be surprised 
to see what astonishing resemblances there are 
between Macedonian names and Benjamite. Let 
him, however, bear in mind that the identities 
discovered by Paul and Silas were the fruit of 
intense enthusiasm, of ecstasy, of a prophetic zeal 
which anticipated and so promoted the fulfilment 
of its own types. And let him remember that the 
anticipation was not always found to be exact, 
although on the whole its approach to exactness 
was remarkable. The following coincidences then 
would first strike the eye or the ear : 

■'''i " •?; LXX. Macedonian Names. 

>sn xvm 23, 

Azeka and Makeda = Akte and Makedonia. 

Auein = Eion, port of Amphipolis, on 
the Strymon, one mile from 
the Egnatian road. 



LXX. Macedonian Names. 

Phara = Phagres, three miles further along the 

Rogel = Tragilus, on the Egnatian road. 

Sara = Serrhae or Siris, in the Strymon valley. 

Whether we can venture to carry identification any 
further except as to Beerotha (Beroea) is very 
problematical. Yet considering that two cities, the 
great Amphipolis on Lake Cercinitis, and Apollonia, 
the small, receive mention in the Acts, though only a 
bare mention, as halting places on the Egnatian Road, 
we may perhaps say that the following equations 
would be the result of more hesitating conjecture 
by the Prophets: 

Karapha and Ammona and Aphnei = Kerkine and 
Amphipolis and Apollonia. 

It is a strange fact that this is the reading 
of some MSS. of the Hexapla instead of the 
' Karapha and Kepheira and Monei ' of the restored 
LXX text of Swete, and the ' Kapharammon and 
Aphni' of Stier and Theile. The Benjamite cities 
in Joshua are grouped first (i) as twelve cities 
and their villages, in the East of Benjamin, and 
next (2) as thirteen cities and their villages in 
the Western section. It would then seem natural 
to the Prophets to find the corresponding division 
in (i) Macedonia Prima or Eastern which con- 
sisted of the basin of the Strymon and outlying 


districts, with Amphipolis and Philippi as capitals, 
and in (2) Macedonia Secunda and Tertia which 
extended as far West as the Peneus, with Thessa- 
lonica and Pella as capitals. They would be 
confirmed in this latter identification by finding 
that whereas the above-named places were in the 
first, in the second and more distant group the 
Benjamite Beerotha suggested Beroea, and also the 
Benjamite Seleka suggested again in another form 
Thes-Salonika. If they had variant texts of LXX 
before them, it is possible that they might have 
found in one text a place called Therala where 
' another gave for the same place Nakan,^ and if so 
there was nothing to prevent them from supposing 
that the two forms gave either half of the true name 
Theralanakan, or Thessalonica. 

There was at least, from the prophetic point of 

view, this very striking piece of guidance to be found 

Fosh xviii 8. in Jesus : ' And thus I will bring out for you a 

Foshxviiiio. lot (KXijpov) before the Lord in Selo.' . . . 'And 

Jesus cast in for them ... a lot in Selo before the 

Lord.' Selo, be it remembered, is the LXX form 

roshxviiii. of ShUoli. It was therefore plain that 'a lot' was 

to be expected on the arrival of the Prophets at 

Selo. The nature of this ' lot ' appeared to be 

shewn in a previous verse of Jesus: 'And there was 

gathered together a whole synagogue of the sons 

of Israel unto Selo.^ Now there is not much 

^ Field, Origen's Hexapla in loc. 


ingenuity required for the identification of Selo as 
a prophetic name with the great sea-port of 
Macedonia, Thessalonica. It would seem to Paul 
and Silas that they were led thither, and that if so, 
the synagogue there was the lot, or part of the lot. 
Silas then, we observe, has duly marked the ful- 
filment of the prophecy by recording quietly the 
words : — ' They came to Thessalonica, where was a ac xvii i. 
synagogue of the Jews.' The expression is perplexing 
on any other hypothesis but that the author of 
Acts means to point back to Josh xviii i. For at 
a large place like Thessalonica there must have 
been more than one synagogue. Lewin and Alford 
say that we must read ' the synagogue.' WH are 
opposed to this. I take the true bearing of the 
words to be this : ' There was at least one 
synagogue and therefore Joshua xviii i was fulfilled.' 
The fact that the later name was Salonike suffices 
to shew that the first syllable Thes- was not very 
strongly pronounced, perhaps as early as St Paul's 
time. The difference of sound would therefore not 
forbid the fulfilment of Selo in Thessalonica. i xh i 5. 

The narrative of the sojourn of Paul and Silas 
in Thessalonica itself exhibits a trace, though not 
more clearly than that of their sojourn at Philippi, of 
the fulfilment of types of the O.T. Let me say 
that anyone who has visited the Passion play of 
Ober-ammergau will be readily disposed to observe 
these N.T. fulfilments, however far-fetched they may 


appear to us. The parallel in question happens to 
concern the personality of Lot, who was distinctly 
a favourite type with Luke.^ Paul and Silas — for 
just here Timothy, though present, is not men- 
tioned — arrived in the strange city of Thessa- 
lonica as the two angels arrived in Sodom. They 
appear to have been sheltered by Jason as the 
angels were received into the house of Lot. 

Then the Jews ' took unto themselves certain vile 
(ifovripovi) fellows of the rabble, and gathering a 
crowd set the city of Thessalonica on an uproar, and 
assaulting the house of Jason they sought to bring 
Paul and Silas forth to the people.' So of old had 
the men of the city encircled the house of Lot, all 
the people together ; and they said to Lot, ' Where 
are the men that came in to thee? bring them out.' 

At Thessalonica they ' found not ' the Apostles : 
at Sodom 'the men at the house-door were smitten 
with blindness.' 

At Thessalonica they 'dragged Jason . . . before 
the rulers.' At Sodom, Lot came out, and said, 
' Nay brethren ; be not ye vile' {Trovripeu<Tr]a9e). Here 
the parallel, which is just perceptible, appears to end. 

Prophetic fulfilment at Troas. 

Ac XX 5. 'And these having gone there (or gone before) 
tarried for us at Troas.' This part of the We- 
document contains further notes of days and places 

' The Christian Prophets, p. 163. 


on the journey from Europe to Asia and along the 
Asiatic coast, and one of the first incidents is the 
restoration of Eutychus to conscious life. We need 
not open the question whether the words, 'he 
was taken up a corpse,' imply actual death or not. 
Now the type of this sign in the Old Testament 
is quite unmistakeable ; it is found in the raising 
of the widow's son at Zarephath. 

The type occurred in a city facing the Western iKixviii7ff. 
Sea : so did the fulfilment at Troas. The very name 
of Zarephath (Tsarfah in Hebrew) bore a strong 
resemblance in sound to Troas. It is quite likely 
that it was locally pronounced Tsrafih ; hence the 
Greek form Sarepta. 

Again the scene at Zarephath introduces us to a loft ac xx a. 
or upper storey : so does the fulfilment to the third 

The sufferer was a boy at Zarephath : at Troas he 
was a young man. 

In the type Elijah's words are, ' Let this child's life 
come into him again ' : in the fulfilment St Paul says, 
' His life is in him! 

In the type Elijah stretched himself upon the child 
(breathed into him LXX) three times : St Paul "fell 
on Eutychus and embraced him." 

Lastly, we may not fail to observe that the type is 
preceded in the story by the eating of 'a morsel of ^^\^yi\^^ 
bread! or rather 'a little cake first,' instead of 'the 
morsel of bread ' (\p-o>fi6v dprov), which was asked for : 


this corresponds in the fulfilment to the description of 
St Paul ' having broken the bread and tasted ' of this 
high token of communion. 

Nor is the effect of the spirit of Jesus to be dis- 
cerned only in the occurrences at Troas and in 
Macedonia. It began earlier still, if we may infer 
from two instances of fulfilment of the Book of 
Jesus by events in this memorable ' second ' journey 
of Paul and Silas. 
Josh V 3, 9. ' Jesus circumcised the sons of Israel . . . and the 
Lord said to Jesus, son of Naue, To-day I take 
away the reproach of Egypt from among you.' St 
Paul had circumcised Timothy, whom 'he wished to 
take the field with him ' — to give the expression 
' come forth ' its military touch once more in accord- 
ance with the military tone of the Book of Jesus — 
' because of the Jews which were in those parts, for 
they all knew that his father was a Greek (heathen).' 
The critics who are so positive that St Paul never 
could do so inconsistent a thing as to circumcise 
Timothy, after all that he had said, or was going 
to say, about ' circumcision availing nothing,' and 
who accordingly infer that the Acts is a falsifica- 
tion and forgery, may perhaps think it worth their 
while to ponder this consideration. St Paul, as a 
Prophet, was guided by the spirit of Jesus, and he 
would be compelled by that record of the circum- 
cision of the people to obey the guidance of Jesus 
in this doubtful case of Timothy also ; for his, of 


course, was the case of the son of a mixed marriage, 
and it was one of chronic disputation, especially 
where the father was the heathen parent. If St 
Paul did not comply with the spirit of Jesus in 
'removing the reproach of Egypt from among' his 
own company, how could he ever face a Jew again 
and profess that he was guided by the spirit of 
Moses' own chosen successor ? It was, therefore, 
no desire of time-serving or ' pleasing men ' on St 
Paul's part that induced him to circumcise Timothy, 
while he afterwards declined to circumcise Titus ; 
but it was a far higher dictate, the humble desire 
to obey the spirit of Jesus, and to ensure the same 
guidance for the future. '^ 

The other act of obedience to the same spirit 
was even more in the course of ministration marked 
out for St Paul in the ' second ' journey, though 
perhaps the correspondence is not quite so clear as 
in the case of the circumcision of Timothy. We 
read in Jesus : ' Be ye very strong to keep and to josh xxiu 6. 
do all the things that are written in the book of 
the law of Moses.' This solemn injunction of the 
law by Jesus to the Israelites is made in accordance 
with the charge of the Lord to him at the first : ' Be josh ; 7 f. 
strong then to keep and to do according as Moses 
my servant commanded thee . . . and the book of 
this law shall not depart from thy mouth . . . then 

'This question of inconsistency, which to many minds does not 
arise here at all, is too large to be treated here. 


shalt thou prosper ..." It seems to be something 
more than fancy, considering what has been said 
above, to infer that when Paul and Silas ' delivered 
them (the brethren in the cities of Asia Minor) the 
decrees for to keep, which had been ordained of the 
Apostles and Elders that were at Jerusalem,' they 
did so in fulfilment of the passage in Jesus. At 
least it may be said that the conclusion of the 
Conciliar letter embodying the decrees is: 'from which 
things if ye keep yourselves, ye shall do well! 
This is essentially an antique ending, though not 
in actual form that of the Book of Jesus, as quoted 
above. Two out of the four Conciliar precepts of 
Jerusalem, those against idolatry and impurity, are 
enjoined clearly by Jesus in his final exhortation to 

joshxxiii7«f the Israelites. 

One more observation. It can hardly be doubted 
that when the Acts says that the Prophets de- 
livered to them the decrees, it means to the be- 
lievers of the synagogues, around which the Churches 
were gathered and out of which they invariably 
grew. The supposition of there being in the time 
of this ' second ' Journey many Gentile-Christians 
who were not and had never been connected with 
Judaism is purely a fiction of theological imagina- 
tion, though it is a fiction which will die hard. 
One of the last verses of Jesus is very instructive 
to Jewish-Christians of the time, and it is this : 

joshxxiv3i 'And Israel worshipped the Lord all the days of 


Jesus and all the days of the elders, as many as 
had lived out the time with Jesus and as many as 
had seen all the works of the Lord which he had 
done to Israel.' The efTect of this passage on the 
early Church would be to increase the veneration in 
which the Christian elders were held, but also, and 
especially, to cause all the new Israel of God to 
persevere in the ancient worship of Temple and 
Synagogue throughout the life-time of the elders 
who had seen the Lord. The effect of this veneration 
is discernible as late even as the time of Irenaeus,^ 
long after the time at which the original basis 
of it in the Book of Jesus had been forgotten. 

It will, finally, occur to the reader to ask, 
whether the occurrences in Macedonia did then 
occur as they are related. The answer is certainly 
that they did occur so : there is nothing whatever 
to shake our acceptance of the history. Had the 
consecutive account in Acts corresponded with the 
consecutive account in Joshua, we should be inclined 
to say that this was a purely manufactured story, 
for history does not repeat itself in a consider- 
able number of consecutive details. But such is 
not the case with these accounts. The fulfilment 
is not a fulfilment of one passage in Joshua, but 

^See The Christian Prophets, p 236 f., quoting Irenaeus' Epistle 
to Florinus : ' These decrees are not those which the elders who were 
before us delivered to thee . . . The intercourse of the rest who had 
seen the Lord.' 


of several disjointed pieces of several passages, which 
are patched together exactly as the Christian prophets 
were wont to patch them. I believe this account 
in Acts is true and accurate history. 

St Paul's speech at Miletus. 

Acts XX 17 to 38 falls next to be considered. 
This passage reports the speech of St Paul to the 
Ephesian elders at Miletus. Though it naturally 
contains no proof of the We-character, it is equally 
natural to consider it part of the We-document in 
which it is imbedded. However this may be, its 
prophetic character has been already exhibited in 
full by the present writer,^ and its close resemblance 
in every line to the ideas of the particular prophetic 
school of Ephesus has been set forth. It is needless 
to say that- these ideas were very much narrower, 
more antique and less developed, than those of St 
Paul at the time. With the simplicity which is 
itself the highest art, and the truth which his own 
experience supported, he addressed the elders in 
words that moved their innermost hearts. No speech 
of his is more tactful, and none certainly is so 

Acts xxi I- 14 is marked by two occasions on 
which Christian prophecy comes into prominence. 
First, at Tyre there were ' disciples ' ^ who began to 
urge St Paul through the Spirit of Prophecy not to 

' The Christian Prophets, p. 180. '^ lb. p. 11. 


go on to Jerusalem. Next at Caesarea, besides 
the four daughters of Philip the Evangelist who 
prophesied/ there was a certain prophet from Judaea 
named Agabus who urged the same advice.^ 

St Paul at Jerusalem : James' rash counsel. 

Acts xxi 15-18. The reference to Mnason, ' arr 
old-fashioned disciple of Cyprus,' the native place of 
Barnabas the Prophet, has been elsewhere noticed 
and explained ^ as a distinctive prophetic feature. 
It may, however, be observed here that the point 
of mentioning an ' old-fashioned ' disciple as pro- 
viding entertainment for St Paul and St Luke on 
the way to Jerusalem * is this : St Paul represented 
the new fashion in prophecy, the new ideas which 
he and Barnabas had set forth at the Council of 
Jerusalem some eight years before, the new and 
much larger faith which opened the door of faith 
to the Gentiles without entrance through the door '^'"'^' 
of circumcision. This seemed a dangerous doctrine. 
Perhaps the danger might be lessened if their host 
adhered to the ' old-fashioned ' opinion and would 
vouch for his guests. This amount of guarantee, 

' The Christian Prophets, pp. 16, 173, 247. ''■lb. p. 175. 

' lb. pp. 234, 242. 

* It seems plain that Blass is right in pointing out how much more 
clearly the position is described in /3 of Acts xxi 16, ' And having 
arrived at a certain village (between Caesarea and Jerusalem) we lodged 
with Mnason, etc' Mnason did not lodge in Jerusalem. 


however, proved quite inadequate ; and James 
accordingly now propounded his almost fatal plan, 
whereby St Paul should appease the rage of ' the 
wild beast' by putting his head into its mouth. ^ 
Nothing could possibly shew St Paul's marvellous 
faith in God's providence and purpose towards him, 
his absolute humility and consideration for others, 
and his willingness to submit to the judgment of 
others, more conclusively than his compliance with 
James's advice. Looking back upon the circum- 
stances now, especially through the mild atmosphere 
of the historian of the Acts, we can see how the 
true colouring of God's purpose has mellowed the 
lurid passions of the Jews, who would have torn 
the Apostle in pieces in the Temple Court. In 
the twentieth century we can take the request of 
James as a matter of course in the unfolding of 

1 Prof. Schmiedel, in Cheyne and Black's Encydopadia Biblica, 
p 46, remarks : ' And had Paul been engaged in carrying out a 
Nazirite vow, it is hardly likely that his presence in the Temple 
could have led to an attempt on his life.' This remark would supply 
justification, if any were needed, for the observations which follow 
in the present chapter, though it was written before I was aware of 
Prof. Schmiedel's article. The encyclopaedists should certainly be 
read, as providing a valuable stimulus to study and promoting a 
clearer understanding of the Acts and of its author's point of view. 
Schmiedel also says (p 43) : ' To prove that Paul himself constantly 
observed the Jewish law would, for Paul, have been simply an 
untruth, and that, too, on a point of his religious conviction that was 
fundamental (Gal iv 9-1 1, Rom x 4, etc.).' This important question 
I must reserve for future discussion. This kind of assertion "is in- 
cessantly overstated by encyclopaedists. 


St Paul's progress to the world's metropolis, where 
he intended to plant the Cross ; we can see that it 
was a move upon the board, which brought in its 
sequel other necessary and most beneficial moves. 
But if we ask how an impartial observer — an in- 
telligent Nicodemus or Gamaliel of the time, if we 
could find him — would have regarded James's action, 
there can be but one answer, that it was the rashest 
and most ill-judged course that could be advised. 
James must have known something of Antichrist. 
He must have known that, just as Messiah was an 
all-pervading dream of the Jews of that and the 
preceding century, so Antichrist was a dream, an 
almost universal dream, a dream that fiercely 
haunted many of the Jews, and haunted some of 
them more closely than did that of Messiah. Their 
minds would be full of him ; and some who could 
not rise high enough in the moral scale to thrill 
with the joyful hope and aspiration for a personal 
Son of Man, could very well summon up a fiery 
and patriotic indignation that would storm forth 
against so devilish a thought as " the abomination 
of desolation spoken of by Daniel the Prophet 
standing where it ought not " in the Temple of the 
Most High. 

Jewish Views of Antichrist. 

Now just as the dream of a Messiah took many 
different forms in different minds, so did the dream 


of an Antichrist. In the mind of John of Ephesus, 
since the term Antichrist is not mentioned in the 
Apocalypse, we can hardly say^ that it designated 
Rome.2 But the idea is essentially that Rome or its 
representative was Antichrist. St Paul himself, 
though he again has never used the term, speaks 
of the Man of Sin as if he were Antichrist, and 
he takes the exactly opposite view to John,^ in 
that he regards Rome as the beneficent controlling 
power which restrains Antichrist at present, while 
John in his indignation at the Emperor-worship 
under Nero regards Rome as the Church's deadliest 
foe. The true Roman citizen, who was also Jew 
by birth and training and Christian by conviction, 
would have been grievously vexed with the Ephesian 
seer's outburst against Rome. It is hardly too much 

' With Dr. Charles, Eschatology, p. 348. 

^ I have endeavoured co shew in The Christian Prophets, pp. 136 if, 
that in 2 John, which I hold to be by the Seer of Apocalypse, the 
description of Antichrist is totally different from the description in 1 
John, which appears to be by the same author as the Fourth Gospel. 
It is true that in both i John and 2 John the definition of Antichrist is 
doctrinal in kind. But in I John Antichrist is a false Christian teacher, 
who denies the Father and the Son : while in 2 John Antichrist is any 
one who refuses to confess Jesus as the Christ that was to come in 
flesh. The protest against this heathen preaching is of course quite of 
a piece with the savage protest against the Emperor-worship of Rome 
in the Apocalypse. 

"2 Th ii 3, 4 8ti ib,v fi,T} i\8ri ri dTroa-Ta<rla irpwTov Kai a,TroKaXvrj>8^ 
6 dvOpitiiroi TTJs ivofilas, 6 vids ttjs diruXeias, 6 dvTLKeifievos Kai ijTre- 
paipo/iems iirl irdfra Xeydiievov 9ebv fj (ri^acfua,, SxTTe airriv eis rbv 
vabv Tov deou Kadiaac, airodeLKvijVTa Eavrbv &n ^anv 6e6i. 


to say that had Paul the Aged survived to read 

the Apocalypse it would have broken his heart 

He was spared that piercing thrust, that ' wounding zechxiue 

in the house of his friends.' 

If all this difference of opinion could exist between 
two N.T. writers on the subject of Antichrist, it is 
plain that no less difference would reign among 
different Jewish minds.^ There is an equal difference 
between the charges brought against St Paul by the 
Jews in different places. When it suited them they 
could, as at Thessalonica, accuse him of ' acting 
contrary to the decrees of Csesar, saying that there is 
another king, Jesus.' Yet at Antioch in Pisidia the 
Jews, 'filled with jealousy' had 'urged on the devout A.cym^s,i,a 
women of honourable estate,' presumably on high 
scriptural grounds of O.T. At Corinth again the Ac iviii 13 
Jews had alleged the injury done by Paul to the 
Mosaic Law. At Ephesus^ they complained of hisAcxixi3 
injuring their trade in magic. Now it is certain 
that there were Jews in Ephesus as everywhere 
else who held strongly the belief in Antichrist. 
Nowhere was the Book of Daniel more closely 
studied : nowhere was there a more fruitful crop 

1 See Dr. Charles, Eschatology, p. 380 ff. n. for a discussion of the 
Jewish origin of the idea of Antichrist, which we must remember was 
as shifting and unsubstantial and yet impressive as a dream. 

^Blass quotes from Wessely, Ephesia Gtammata, Vienna, 1886, 
and Abh. d. Wien. Akad., 1888, 2, a form of exorcism in a 
Paris papyrus, which contains the name of 'Jesus, the God of the 



of Messianic literature:'- nowhere were persons more 
awake for Judaism than in the birthplace of the 
Apocalypse of John. 

St Paul was Antichrist to the Jeivs. 

The Ephesian or Asiatic Jews — for here as usual 
"Asiatic" means of the Roman Province of Asia^ 
—would bear at this time a special grudge against 

Acxix33 St Paul personally. At the tumult at Ephesus 
they had put forward Alexander, in order if 
possible, to prove to the excited mob that the 
Jews were not to be saddled with the offences of 
this apostate Pharisee, Saul of Tarsus. They failed, 
and they doubtless had suffered in consequence 
since. But above all they were infuriated by his 
teaching. Had he not himself said to the Thessa- 

zThiis lonians that there was to be a great "apostasy" 
before Antichrist came .' ' Anathema,' they would 
say; 'he is the apostate himself; he teacheth men 
to believe that Jesus is the Christ ; he maketh 
the Law of Moses to be of none effect ; he ceaseth 
not to speak against the Holy Place ; he saith that 
the Jew hath no advantage ; that Abraham hath 
nothing whereof to glory ; that circumcision is 
nothing ; that the Jew is abolished.' They plotted 

1 See The Chiistian Prophets, p. 77 , on " Asia" in 4 Esdras. 
^ Ih. p. 122. 


to take his life at Cenchrea, and thought they were 
doing God service. For was it not written in the 
Book of Daniel: "And in his place shall stand up Dan xi 21, 

^ *- 25, 26(lxx) 

a contemptible person, to whom they shall not give 
the glory of a king; but he shall come in suddenly, 
and obtain the kingdom by lottery (or inheritance, 
but in the Chaldee flatteries?) . . But he shall not 
stand, for a device shall be devised against him." 
Had not St Paul's weak bodily presence and con- 2 Cor x 10 
temptible power of speech been already criticised 
by the Corinthian objectors .'' Had not St Paul 
preached much about the " inheritance of the Saints " 
and their lot. Had he not been already accused 
of preaching the Kingdom by flatteries, as he ad- 
mitted himself when he wrote to the Galatians : 
" Am I now persuading men, or God .'' or am I Gai i 10 
seeking to please meji .' " Had he not enlarged in 
preaching about the " lot of inheritance } " It would 
be easy for Asiatic Jews^ to see in many of his 

^ It seems possible, though improbable, that the Asiatic, i.e. Ephesian, 
Jews who took the leading part in arresting Paul were well versed in 
the Chaldee of Dan vii-xi, but they certainly knew it in LXX, and 
probably had other versions of it also. From the valuable articles of 
Dr Gwynn on Symmachus, Theodotion, Hexapla, etc., in Smith's 
Dtct. of Christian Biography, we gather that other versions existed. 
Such a famous eschatological passage as this would be most closely 
studied and jealously guarded. Thus Aquila's version of Dan ix 26, 
27 was so hallowed, that when Symmachus came to make his version, 
he did not venture to alter its sense. See D. C. B. Art. Symmachus. 
By Aquila's literal version, to the fanatical students of prophecy it 
would be even plainer than by the LXX, that St Paul was Antichrist, 
and ought to be slain at once, to do God service. 



actions and doctrines the fulfilment of ancient 
prophecy. And it was easy to find more than forty 
resolute Jews who should forecast devices against 
him, in other words, plot his destruction. For there 
is no wind to fan the fanatical flame so strong as 
a popular belief in the fulfilment of prophecy. 
The prophecies in the Book of Daniel continued : 

Dan xi 31 " And strong arms shall stand on his part." Well, 
the strong arm of the law of Rome had protected 
him once and again against the spluttering fury of 
the Jews, at Corinth and at Ephesus. Only one 
step more was needed ; it was that he should be 

Acxxuef found standing in the Temple of God. "And they 
shall pollute the sanctuary of awe, and shall take 

Numvij3-2o away the daily sacrifice." "And they shall place 
the abomination that maketh desolate." Exactly so. 
Saul, they would say, is abolishing the sacrifice by 
introducing the polluted heathen into the Temple, 
where he had as a fact himself entered in order 
to make the offerings prescribed in the Law. It 

Danxiss was written: "He shall honour with gold and silver 

Dan ix 26, 27a god whom his fathers did not know." "A 


kingdom of Gentiles shall corrupt the city and 
the Holy Place with the Messiah" — ^just what Saul 
of Tarsus was doing, in bringing the offerings, so 
long and carefully collected from the Gentile 
Churches, to aid the poor Saints in Jerusalem in 
Dan ix 35 the name of Messiah ! — " and in the end of the 
week there shall be removed the sacrifice and the 


libation." "And some of them of understanding Ac xxi 26 
shall devise for purifying themselves" — exactly 
what St Paul was doing in the Temple. Now 
they had watched for him day after day, and he 
had been seen in the Temple, at the altar, and 
his four ragged men with him. What were these 
four 1 Were they not also the four 'horns' (Chaldee, 
' notable ones ') towards the four winds of heaven 
spoken of also by Daniel the prophet .'' And what 
was their poor ragged appearance but a crafty 
disguise of Beelzebub? For " the four bruised ones Dan viiis, 

22 (lxx) 

were not according to their real strength." And 
what was Saul doing but confirming his diabolic 
covenant for one week ? And what was he about 
to do but to stop the sacrifice and overspread the 
abomination of desolation } They must not wait 
the full seven days, or they would be too late. So 
when the "seven days were almost ended, theyAcxxi27 
stirred up the people and took forcible hold of him." 
The conclusion, the wild conviction and cer- 
tainty, that the Jews would draw from these 
coincidences was that Saul of Tarsus was Anti- 
christ himself. Swiftly enough the rumour flew 
from mouth to mouth. And no wonder that the}' 
cried, " Away with him ! " There was for them no 
other way of dealing with " the man of lawlessness " ^ 

' The whole passage, which is obscure enough in the original is more 
so in the LXX, but it is quite capable of an interpretation which would 
make Saul of Tarsus to be Antichrist to a fervent Jew of 58 a.d. 


2Thii3 who opposed the law of Moses, "the man of sin 

the son of perdition." 
Ac xxiii 23 The subsequent measures for his safety which 
Claudius Lysias found it necessary to take are 
quite incommensurate with the idea of an ordinary 
accused person ; but 470 foot and horse were not 
too many to guard the supposed Antichrist on his 
way to the court of justice at Caesarea, at least as 
far as Antipatris. Indeed the plot against St Paul, 
subsequent to his rescue by the Chiliarch, appears, 
to have been prompted by an increased conviction 
on the part of the Jews that Antichrist had been 
snatched from them. The Romans, in fact, were 
fulfilling their part of the prophecy in Daniel just 
as St Paul had been fulfilling his. For Daniel con- 
Dan xi 30 tinues : "And the Romans shall come and shall 


thrust him out, and he shall turn round " — this St 

Paul had done when he stood on the castle steps 

Acxxi4o and waved his hand to the people — "and they shall 

Ac xxii 20- 

22 be angry upon the Covenant of the Holy One 
(or Holy Place)," — ^thus they had been angry when 
he reminded them of Stephen, and the covenant 
once made with their fathers and now extended 
to the heathen. Anyone who will read the 8th, 9th 
and nth chapters of Daniel, in the lurid light of 
an Ephesian Jew, so far as he can place himself in 
so passionate a position, will appreciate something 
of the half-reasoned frenzy which flung the mob 
and their conspirators upon the innocent Apostle. 



The Standing-Point of the Writer of the Acts. 

The theory of the identity of Luke with Silas is no 
new one either here or on the Continent. Alford, 
who shews himself so frequently a critic of no mean 
acumen and independence, says : " More ingenious, 
and admitting of more plausible defence, is the 
hypothesis, which identifies Luke himself with Silas." 
And he refers to the literary history of the N.T. in 
Kitto's fournal of Sacred Literature for Oct. 1850. 
The theory did not seem 50 years ago to lead to 
anything in particular, but I have hopes that it may 
now, in connection with the evidence set forth else- 
where^ for Luke being the writer of 2 Peter, awaken 
greater interest and perhaps find wider acceptance. 

It follows from the considerations of the previous 
chapter that the latter portion of the Acts, describing 
the circumstances of St Paul's first captivity and 

^ The Christian Prophets, p. 159. 


voyage to Rome, is deeply interwoven with a thread 
of Jewish and Christian prophetic thought. Current 
prophetic ideas of the Jews could not be held apart 
from current Christian prophetic ideas so long as it 
was possible for the same individual to be a Jew 
and a Christian at the same time. The Jew was 
expecting the coming of Messiah and must there- 
fore strain his eager gaze into the future. But no 
sooner was he convinced that the object of his 
gaze was removed into the recent past, no sooner 
was he convinced that Jesus of Nazareth was the 
Messiah, than he felt also that another object, the 
Second Advent, was as much to him in the future 
as the first Advent had been before. The momentum 
gathered by his former outlook, if we may use a 
material figure, was not suddenly brought to a halt 
and backed to a retrospect : it was continued in the 
same future direction towards the same object only 
in a converted form, the Son of Man coming in glory 
instead of in humility. And that humility was repre- 
sented to him as the necessary preliminary to the 
glory, and in fact as part of it. The only question 
was how soon the Second Advent was to follow 
after the first. The answer was at first simply a 
prophetic week, the eighth week after the seven.^ 
So said the Book of Enoch. But any one conversant 
with prophecy could say that an eighth week was a 
week not of days, but of years (7), or a week of 
'See chapter viii. below and p. 145 note. 



seven years (49), or half of that period. It tended 
to lengthen itself, until the great crisis of 70 A.D. 
was past, and the supposed 'time, times, and half a Danyiias. 

Ap xi 2, 3, 

time' were fulfilled. All this time thousands of Jews „''"^:. 

'' Dan xii ir. 

were also Christians. But there is no proof whatever '^p '"" 5- 
that even so much as hundreds of Gentiles were 
Christians without having first become Jews. When 
St Paul preached to pure Gentiles, at Athens, all 
that we know is that his preaching produced hardly 
any conversions. It must always be difficult for the 
modern reader to place himself in thought in this 
interim of Christian faith between 35 and 70 A.D. 
But he must not assume that there were very 
many Gentile believers before 70, and for some 
years after. 

Of course after 70 A.D. it became clear that the 
dual character of Judaism and Christianity combined 
in the same person was no longer possible. But it 
would not become clear to all Jewish Christians at 
one and the same time. To some it would be clear 
immediately. We can imagine that to St Paul, had 
he survived to 70 a.d., it would have been quickly 

clear, indeed that it was almost clear before he 2 Tim Un 


passed away. But a John of Ephesus would be very 
slow to read the signs of the times as we read them 
now. Having nailed his faith to the future destruc- 
tion of Rome, he would hardly believe the actual 
destruction of Jerusalem instead, and the continued 
existence of the Babylon of his prophecy. Between 


these extremes there would be various halting-places 
of thought, and Luke's would be found to approach 
the position of his beloved fellow-traveller. 

Let us endeavour briefly to take the bearings of 
this position, in regard to four points, i. If we agree 
with Ramsay in the view that Luke's ' hatred of the 
Jeivs, and his obvious inability to feel the slighest 
sympathy for their attitude towards Paul, are also 
Greek,' we may bear in mind that the same^ hatred 
and want of sympathy belonged not only to St Paul 
himself in periodical flashes at a much earlier period 
— twenty years before the Acts was written^ — but to 
any Christian, though by birth a Jew, who wrote but 
a few years after 70 A.D. And they would not prove 
that the person who entertained them was a Greek, 
that is, of heathen birth. A Gentile origin for Luke 
is far from being proved at present. I cannot myself 
profess to see the said hatred in the pages of the 
Acts, nor even the same entire detachment from the 
Jews as a people which is obvious in the pages of the 
Fourth Gospel. Again, I can see no more ' blindness 
to the true character of the ^ Roman name (the tria 
nomind) ' in Acts than I can in almost any page of 
Pliny or Tacitus. I do not see that Luke shews 
himself to be anything but a Roman citizen, a Greek 

'Cf. e.g. I Th ii 15, "The Jews who also slew the Lord Jesus and 
persecuted the prophets and us. ..." Certainly the Christian Pro- 
phets are meant. 

'^St Patilthe Traveller, p. 207. 


by speech, and a Jew by origin, when he speaks of 
the Maltese as the barbarians. But this last ex- 
pression I do take as a sign — and the account of ac> 
the occurrence at Philippi is another, — that the Ac > 
writer of the We-document was a Roman citizen. 
At present we may be content to infer that several 
passages in Acts which were originally jotted down 
at one epoch of the prophetic life and circle of 
thought appear in the present ' Acts ' in a form which 
has been modified by the elimination of some of their 
closer prophetic features. We may go further and say 
that St Luke had in his notes many more points than 
those which can be discovered underlying the present 
text, in developing the fulfilment of the Book of Joshua. 
These were deliberately excised by him in writing 
his Book perhaps for this reason : they would unduly 
have identified the work with those extreme Jewish 
Christian Prophets, of whom John of Ephesus was 
the chief representative, and who in remaining Jewish 
could not but be anti-Roman. Now it was Luke's 
purpose, as Ramsay has most ably pointed out,^ to 
shew that the Christian Church as led by St Paul was 
loyal to Rome and dependent on the Roman Govern- 
ment for its freedom and beneficence as a regenerating 
power in the Empire. It was therefore wisdom in St 

' St Paul the Traveller, p. 304. See also Julicher, Jahrb. f. prot. 
Theol., 1882, p. 358, who however exaggerates greatly this tend- 
ency, and tries to make it account for the growth in the second century 
of the story that Paul was a Roman citizen. But the second century 
was not equal to composing so good a romance as Julicher thinks. 


Luke, as well as literary proportion, that curtailed the 
account of the prophetic springs of action in the first 
entrance of the two Apostles into Europe. ' The 
• 42- Spirit of Jesus ' and ' the portion ' and ' we were 
thinking' are the only traces left to us. When 
Ramsay sketched the probable contents of St Luke's 
third book^ he would have been quite justified in 
quoting an ancient testimony to the fact that it was 
actually composed. The Muratorian fragment says 
so, as follows : " As also he clearly points out in a 
separate book (semote) not only the suffering of 
Peter, but moreover Paul's departure from the city 
(Rome) to Spain." The existence of this third work 
alone explains the expression in Acts i i. 'The 
former treatise ' is wrongly translated in R.V. The 
margin of R.V. is right, 'The first treatise,' im- 
plying more than two, which are the Gospel and the 

2. This leads us to ask whether we can draw any 
conclusion as to the Roman citizenship of the writer 
of Acts. The right of Roman citizenship was not so 
common that it would be immaterial to St Paul in 
choosing his fellow-traveller along the highways of 
Roman commerce. But it is generally admitted that 
Silas was a Roman citizen on the ground of Acts 
xvi 37. It may be argued, however, that the author 
of Acts was not a Roman citizen, and that in speak- 
ing of the barbarians in xxviii 1,4, he is only speaking 

'^ St Paul the Traveller, p. 351. 


as a Greek, or from the point of view of St Paul's 
citizenship and not his own. But why must we 
suppose that a writer would, in his own diary, take 
his friend's point of view ? He is, on the contrary, 
almost certain to take his own point of view. It 
would be affectation to deny this. I should freely 
admit that Luke, who has been shewn in these 
pages to be a Jew, would more naturally speak 
of them as heathens than as barbarians. But 
he really implies that they were not only heathens 
but barbarous heathens. The point of the expression 
is one of the Melitans' language rather than of their 
status or citizenship. The term barbarian appears 
nowhere else in N.T. except in St Paul's writings, i Cor xiv : 
once where it is clearly of foreign and unintelligible Rom i 14. 
language, and twice where it means uncivilized,^ in 
contrast with Greeks and Romans. In fact the only 
other N.T. writer who uses it is himself a Roman 
citizen. On the whole then, if the expression in Acts 
xxviii is not sufficient to prove the author to be a 
Roman citizen, it is a very strong indication that he 

3. The Unity of style in the We-document and the 
rest of the Acts does not unfortunately permit of any 
close or certain inference, because however much the 
materials of the book have been worked up by the 
author, it is impossible to determine within some 

^See Lightfoot on Col iii II, a. learned note, shewing that the 
Scythian was held to be an outer barbarian. 



chapters {e.g. after xxi i8) the limits of the supposed 

4. The close interiveaving of the We-document with 
the rest is a feature which offers surer ground. It is 
supposed that the We-portions are due to Luke's 
presence at the scenes described and the others to his 
absence. The meeting at Troas has been mentioned 
already above. But do the picturesque circumstances 
imagined by Ramsay explain the difficulty of 'first 
of the portion,' or account for the unique phrase ' the 
Spirit of Jesus,' so well as the observations given in 
these pages .■' Are they consistent with the latter ? 
We have to take the phenomena as a whole. Let us 
see how they correspond with one another if we 
suppose the writer of Acts to be Silas.^ 

The Prophets travelled in pairs. 

First, it was the rule that Prophets went forth two 
and two as apostles. Not to mention the despatch 

'A useful list may be found in S. Davidson Int. to N.T., vol. ii 4. 

^ Blass has recently collected, preface to Lucae ad Theophilum Liber 
prior (Leipzig, 1897), p. xvii, the results of the peculiarities of /3 
as follows : (for explanation of ;8 see chapter viii) 

Words found in ^ of Acts and nowhere else in N.T. , total 30 : 
Words found in ^ of Acts and in Lk. Gospel only, total 3 : 
Words found in (3 and N. T. but nowhere else in Luke, total 20 : 
Words found in (3 Acts and Lk. Gospel and elsewhere, total 10. 
These are approximate only. So far from being an inordinate propor- 
tion, the number of peculiarities in ^ is well within the mark. 


(eVei^i/rei/) by John the Baptist^ of two of his disciples LkvUig. 
to Jesus, since the term is not quite synonymous 
with apostleship, we may notice that Jesus sent forth 
(aTreoTTejXe) two disciples to find the ass for the entry Mt xxi i. 
into Jerusalem. He had before this begun the 
systematic sending forth of the twelve two and two, Mkvi7. 
with full apostolic instructions. St Luke tells us 
that 'He sent forth the seventy in pairs before Lkxi. 
his face into every city and place where he himself 
was to come.' The same rule was observed by the 
Church as by the Master. Even in the Temple 
Peter and John are found together. The same two Ac m 1. 
are sent forth to Samaria by the apostles at Jeru- Acviiii4. 
salem. When the disciples at Antioch sent relief 
to the brethren in Judaea, they sent it forth by the Acxiso. 
apostolic hands of Barnabas and Saul. A little later 
Barnabas and Saul were separated for the work unto Acxiiia. 
which God had called them, and they remained 
together for the whole journey, with or without John 
Mark who was Barnabas' cousin. From Paphos to ac xiu 13. 
Perga at any rate there seem to have been other 
members of the party, but Barnabas remained 
throughout. Even when Paul and Barnabas are 
despatched {ireixyp-ai) from Jerusalem with the decrees 
to Antioch, the Apostles and Elders and the whole 
church send forth {airecrraXKanev) a second pair as ac xv 27. 
Apostles with them, Judas and Silas, both Prophets. 

^John is accompanied by two of his disciples on another occasion. 
Jn i 35- 


When Paul starts with Silas, the term used of his 
selection is rather remarkable; it implies that he 
chose him for himself into the place of Barnabas. 
The word used of Mark's association with the two 
undoubtedly implies that he had an unofficial place, 
Ac XV 37, and was extra niimerum. He had been with them 

Ac xui 5. 

as an attendant. When we come to Timothy the 
Acxvia. expression is wholly different — 'Paul chose that he 
should take the field with him ' — which suits very 
well with the idea of the campaign and conquest 
of the Promised Land. 

The movements of Silas in Acts. 

Now let us observe the movements of Silas, and 
we shall see that whenever the We-document is 
present Silas is unmentioned ; as soon as he is 
mentioned again, the We-document ceases. Silas 
is commended to the grace of the Lord by the 
brethren at Antioch. He visits Derbe and Lystra ; 
and the Phrygian and Galatian country, and 
goes past Mysia to Troas. After the vision, 
' WE sought to go into Macedonia ; WE were 
concluding that God hath called US to evangelize 

Let us pause to ask whether any newly-converted 
Luke was in a position to speak of himself as 
joined already in this great and solemn campaign 


with the two apostles, as united in drawing^ the 
important conclusion of Christian Prophecy, as being 
on a level with these proved and earnest students 
of the word of God. Ramsay seems to feel the 
difficulty here, and he accounts for it by saying 
that " the words derive their vivid and striking 
character from Paul, who explained the whole divine 
plan,^ and they remained indelibly imprinted on 
Luke's memory." Are we then to suppose that inside 
the We-document there is a sort of We-we-document, 
which represents the innermost WE composed of 
Paul and Silas, so that the words ' immediately we 
sought . . . preach to them ' are between inverted 
commas, being St Paul's words quoted by St Luke ? 
Rather do I welcome Ramsay's reference to memory 
in the case of a We-passage, for I hold that there 
is no We-document at all, but that the We-passages 
rest upon merriory alone. The Prophets were 
two ; the men sent ' to view the land, even Jericho,' 
were two ; no third party, no fourth party counting 
the young Timothy as a third, could, whether by 
love at first sight or any other cause, add himself 
to the others and speak as if he shared in this 
august interpretation of the will of God. On the 
other hand, if Silas was the author of Acts, nothing 

^ The question was asked long ago by Schleiermacher, how a new- 
comer converted only yesterday could have expressed himself with so 
little modesty as 'immediately we endeavoured . . . ; the Lord had 
called us.' See Godet, Comm. on St Luke, E.T. i p. 19. 

^ St Paul the Traveller, p. 200. 


could be more natural than the words. The change 
of person is not made at random ; there was a 
reason, which may perhaps have been suggested 
rightly above (p. 41), but in any case we may admit, 
with Ramsay, that the book was left unfinished by 
the author, and we can conceive that had it been sub- 
mitted to a third draft, the We-passages might have 
been further reduced or eliminated by the author. 
Acxvi. 'We ran with a straight course . . . WE were in 
the city . . . WE went out . . . WE thought . . . 
WE were talking . . . She constrained us . . . WE 
were going ... A damsel met US . . . followed Paul 
and Us.' I see no difficulty here in the meaning 
of US. By the third US is meant Silas and Timothy, 
or Silas alone ; for St Paul in his epistles speaks 
again and again of US when he means ' me.' The 
first person plural is a way of avoiding the first 
person singular, which Greeks and Romans in their 
letters were more careful to avoid than we are now. 

Two verses after this we have ' Paul and Silas ' 
to the end of the incident. It is easy to see how 
Silas, if he wrote Acts, would prefer to describe 
his sufferings in the third person. 

Silas at Philippi. 

Silas visits with St Paul Amphipolis, ApoUonia, 
Thessalonica, Beroea. At the last place, if the reading 
of Westcott and Hort is right, the synagogue was 



in a quarter away from the city. ' They arrived and 
went away to the synagogue.' This strange expression 
is a trace of an eye-witness. I can see no difference 
between the description of events here and at Philippi 
except what has been fully accounted for above. The 
almost universal theory is that Luke stayed behind at 
Philippi, to preach and teach there, though he had 
been an unknown stranger to St Paul, according to 
Ramsay, a fortnight before ; by the older view he 
was a tried minister of the Gospel who came upon the 
scene at Troas, we know not how. If he stayed 
there in any capacity whatever, he stayed, we are to 
suppose, a portion of several years. Lightfoot^ says 
"he was taken up there after several years, and 
perhaps he had spent there some portion of the 
intervening period." If he stayed there several years 
why, in the Epistle to the Philippians, is not Luke 
mentioned or referred to once ? Was it not ex- 
pedient to say a word about the first Christian 
Apostle to that much beloved Church? St Paul 
could mention Epaphroditus, Euodia, Syntyche, and 
Clement ; why not a word about Luke ? The Philip- 
pian Church had been specially munificent to St 
Paul, and this kindness must have been due in some phii iv 15 f. 
degree to Luke's preaching if he stayed there at all. 
Why is the individual spring of this kindness ignored 
by the Apostle in writing } The answer about to be 
given to this question is that he is not ignored, for the 

1 Coinm. on Phil, 1879, p. 39. 


Phil iv 3. ' true yoke-fellow ' is Silas-Luke. The names ' Silas ' 
and ' Luke ' are both omitted in the Epistle, while 
Timothy is mentioned. It may well be that Silas left 
Rome for a visit to Philippi and to return (see below). 
In any case the absence in Philippians of a reference 
to the supposed sojourn of Luke during the ' second ' 
and 'third' journeys would be most damaging to 
the almost universal theory of such a sojourn. If he 
did not stay there, and yet had not accompanied St 
Paul in the interval, it would be a coincidence that 
six and a half years afterwards he should be picked 
up there by St Paul when about to rejoin his party at 
Troas on the return from his ' third ' journey. Upon 
either supposition we note that the WE-author is 
there when Silas is not. Where was Silas .' To 
answer this we resume the thread of the history. 

Silas and Beroea. 

We start with a difficult verse, and there are more 
perplexities in this part of the history than appear at 
first. I understand xvii 14 to mean that the brethren, 
being Christians of Jewish birth who studied the 
O.T. with eagerness and candour, desired to avoid the 
trouble and loss^ which had ensued at Thessalonica 
from keeping St Paul, and on this occasion quickly 
sent him away, escorting him as far as the sea. This 
was a keen trial to him ; it seemed like a surrender of 

1 ' They received the word in (spite of) much affliction,' I Th i 6. 


the divinely given portion of Macedonia : but it was 
necessary/ and there was too (re) the comfort that 
both Silas and. Timothy were resolved to remain 
behind at Beroea to carry on the work. Those who 
conducted Paul to the sea at Dium thought it best to 
bring him as far as Athens. There may be, as Lewin 
suggests, an underlying reference to St Paul's infirmity, 
but there may well have been special dangers in the 
sea-voyage from Dium to Athens : he could not in 
safety be allowed to travel alone. Silas and Timothy 
resolved to stay behind at Beroea because of the 
prophetic promise of the opening for the Gospel 
there and at Thessalonica,. and Timothy was able to 
return to Thessalonica — a journey of upwards of 50 
miles — before he and Silas rejoined St Paul at the 
end of the year at Corinth.^ AcxviUs. 

^ ' There is no doubt that here, where again ^ alone records such 
intimations of the Spirit, Paul was travelling in company with a 
Prophet,' Zahn, Einl. ii 343. He was a Prophet himself, though Zahn 
denies that Paul and Barnabas were Prophets (i 148, 170) — of which 
more hereafter — but Zahn's statement is one of great value for the 
support of the present contention that Luke was Silas. How else 
could Luke have known the interior movements of Paul's mind in 
all its incessant changes? 

^ It is of course possible to take I Th iii I as meaning that 
Timothy came to St Paul at Athens, and then went back to 
Thessalonica, and then to Beroea to join Silas, and so came on with 
him to St Paul at Corinth. But I think it is also possible, and, on 
the whole, more natural, to understand the words as above : ' I felt 
that I must have news of you, and so I thought well to go to Athens 
and be there without my companions, and I sent or left word with ' Th iii i. 
Timothy that he was to go ' back to Thessalonica, and return with 
Silas 'as quickly as possible' to join him. Zahn, Einl. i 147. Acxviiis. 


Silas disappears. 

From this point onwards there is no word about 
' Silas ' in the Acts. He disappears, according to the 
almost universal theory, from the historian's ken. 
Probably the chief reason which has led to the 
almost universal identification of Silas with Silvanus 
is a sense that somehow Silas was not dropped over- 
board in the Aegean sea, was not beaten to death, did 
not die prematurely, that — 

He must not float upon his watery bier 
Unwept, and welter to the parching wind, 
Without the meed of some melodious tear. 

It is a very proper sense, and so they said he was 
Silvanus. But they have not reflected that he should 
have been Silanus, as far as evidence goes, and they 
have not accounted for his being Silvanus.^ We are 
therefore only carrying on the same sense when we 
endeavour to identify Silas with Luke. 

Now there is exactly the same silence of the 
historian with regard to the separate action of 
Silas as with regard to that of the We-author. 
Neither of them is, neither of them has been from 
the first, in the narrative of Acts, any more than a 
shadow of St Paul. If it be held that St Luke 
was left behind at Philippi, which is pure though 
almost universal conjecture, so is Silas left behind 
^ See above p. 9. 



at Beroea, which is plain fact. But nothing is said 
of what Silas did ; not even that he preached and 
taught. His movements are only mentioned as 
subordinate to those of St Paul. Silas, if he wrote 
the Acts, is not less modest about Silas, than 
Luke, if he wrote it, is modest about Luke. We 
know nothing more of Silas either in Acts or in 
the Epistles or elsewhere. Lewin supposes, and we 
may agree with him, that he crossed from Corinth to 
Ephesus with St Paul ; possibly too he went thence 
to Caesarea, to Antioch, to Galatia, and Phrygia, ac xviii ; 
and Ephesus : and thence to Macedonia. There it 
would be a natural supposition in accordance with 
xvii 14 that Silas stayed, and there St Paul and ac xx 1. 
his company joined him after a few months, andAcxxs. 
we have the We-author again, to continue with us 
to Jerusalem, and afterwards on the voyages to 

Silvanus in the Epistles. 

We now turn to the evidence of the Epistles, 
and we find nothing whatever to upset the identity 
of Silas with Silvanus, and nothing to upset the 
identity of Silvanus with Luke. 

The First Epistle to the Thessalonians was written 
from Corinth in the ' second ' journey. The address 
is by Paul and Silvanus and Timotheus. Silas 
and Timothy had both rejoined him. The same 
is true of the Second Epistle. 


The Epistle to the Galatians contains no refer- 
Gaiviii. ence to Silvanus. It states that it was written by 
Paul's own hand. This is a contrast to 2 Thess. which 
expressly says, ' The salutation of me Paul by nny 
own hand.' Had Silas been present when Galatians 
was written, it might have been couched in other 

The First Epistle to the Corinthians contains no 
reference to Silvanus. It resembles 2 Thess. in 
the same statement in the four concluding lines. 

The Brother whose Praise is in all the Churches. 

The Second Epistle to the Corinthians does not 

include Silvanus in the address though it includes 

Timotheus. It refers to Silvanus once by name ; 

2 Cor i 19. 'The Son of God Messiah Jesus who was preached 

among you by our agency, that of myself and 

Silvanus and Timotheus.' It says much about 

Titus and his movements, and there is much to be 

aCorviiie, said in favour of Lewin's^ idea that Titus was a 

=! Cor viii 18. Corinthian. Along with Titus as bearer of the 

letter, St Paul says that he 'sent the brother 

whose praise in the gospel is spread through all 

the churches and not only this, but he was also 

appointed by the churches to travel with us in 

the matter of this generous gift which is being 

ministered by us to promote the glory of the Lord 

^ Lewin, Life and Letters of St Paul, i 302. 


and to shew our readiness : avoiding the risk that any 
man should blame us in the matter of this gift 
which is ministered by us : for we take thought 
for things honourable not only in the sight of the 
Lord, but also in the sight of men.' Now who is 
this so likely to be as Silvanus ? Who had been 
appointed by the churches to travel with Paul? OrAcxv4o. 
are we to draw upon the unknown for the sup- 
position in this case also that ' perhaps St Luke 
had been so appointed ' ? (If so, he was not the 
stranger picked up at Troas). But, let us ask, 
whose praise in the Gospel was spread through all 
the churches} Silas' certainly was, but who shall 
say that Luke's was, if he were not Silas ? Luke's, 
who drops from the clouds at Troas and disappears 
in turn at Philippi ? Praise in Philippi, perhaps: 
but what praise in all the churches could ' Luke ' 
at this time have had ? It might possibly seem 
that Timotheus was the brother in question ; but 
the fact of his sharing the address makes that 
impossible. Trophimus is probably the 'brother' 

who is mentioned next; and the 'brethren' arezCorviUs 

Silas and Trophimus. 

T Tertius who write this Epistle. 

The Epistle to the Romans contains no reference 
to ' Silvanus ' or ' Luke.' It was written from 


Corinth, substantially as it is now, in the ' third ' 
journey during the three months which St Paul 
-Ac XX 2. spent in Hellas. Such at least is the prevailing 
view. It might be left out of our consideration in 
the present question, but for one curious and 
interesting sentence near the end : ' I Tertius who 
write the epistle in the Lord salute you.' I am 
compelled to think that this is Silas' own way of 
translating his name to the readers of the Roman 
Church. They did not know, and he did not know, 
that in later years he would be more often called 
Silvanus or Lucas than Silas. But ' Tertius ' is the 
natural Latin form of the Hebrew name ; and it is 
much more full-sounding than the Greek form 
^ Tritos.' To have turned ' Tritos ' into the Latinised 
Tritus would have been to give another Latin word 
with a separate meaning of its own, and would have 
been therefore an objectionable course which he 
does not take. On the other hand it is reasonable 
to suppose that hitherto such common friends of 
the brethren as Prisca and Aquila had known him 
as Silas. Paul and Silas went about among their 
Jewish friends as Shi'ool and Shaldsh or Shilish. 
But when first he comes under the notice of the 
Church in Rome itself, it is perfectly natural to 
suppose that Silas would translate his name for the 
nonce in Roman form as Tertius. It may be allowed 
that if Paul had referred to him in the body of the 
letter, he would have put Silvanus. But any man 


may be allowed to indulge a fancy about his 
own name on occasion, and if his original name 
were '(23^12^, Tertius is a nearer equivalent in sense 
than Silvanus is in sound. The present theory 
allows the possibility of Luke having remained in 
Macedonia during all the time that St Paul ' went Ac xx 3. 
over those parts,' which include the neighbouring 
part of Illyricum, which may perhaps have been 
the third portion of the Promised Land, Hellas being uomxvig. 
the second. If he was with St Paul at Corinth when 
he wrote the ' Romans' and had been sent to Corinth 
as a bearer of 2 Corinthians, it is most probable that 
the interval had been spent by him at Corinth ; but 
perhaps he left Corinth in order to join him in 
Macedonia, then went along the Egnatian road into 
Illyricum — no very great distance — and went with 
him to Corinth where he wrote the ' Romans.' Why 
this period and portion of St Paul's preaching, even 
if with Silas, is omitted in Acts, we cannot tell, but 
many other periods are also omitted. (It may be that 
the prophetic fulfilments connected with it were less 
striking than those which marked the travels before 
and after it. But this is pure conjecture, nor does 
it affect the facts of the case.) Whatever uncer- 
tainty hangs over the movements of Silas, it does not 
seem to be increased when we identify him with Luke, 
nor even when we identify him with Tertius. 


The Resumption of We in the ' Third' Journey. 

Now we come to another critical time, at which 
St Paul was engaged in conveying the alms of the 
Gentile Churches to Judaea, immediately after writing 
from Corinth his Epistle to the Romans. It is 

Ac XX 4. generally supposed that the Acts has preserved for 
us the names of representative men of those 
Churches, who acted as a Relief Fund Committee, 
or let us say, Churchwardens. St Paul was perhaps 
more concerned about this fund than about anything 
else in his 'third' journey: for the successful collec- 
tion and application of it would do more than 
anything else to prove that the Gospel message 
which he preached among the Gentiles was one 
and the same with the salvation preached to the 

Acxxviiiao. circumcision, which was 'the hope of Israel.' To 
obtain this proof of the unity of the Gospel he had 
laboured for years ; and his object had been three- 
fold : first, to satisfy James and the weaker brethren 
of the conservative side of the Church that he, Paul, 
was not a revolutionary ; next, to test the reality of 
the faith of the Gentile Churches ; and thirdly, to 
relieve the destitution of the Jewish brethren in 
Judaea. There had been, of course, difficulties in the 
collection. The conveyance of the fund, when col- 
lected, was nearly frustrated iby the plot of the Jews, 
which might have resulted fatally to himself at 


Cenchraea. And finally the deliverance of the money 
was to result, as we have seen, in a further risk, still 
more nearly fatal to his life, but overruled by God 
' for the furtherance of the Gospel ' at Rome at 

The Churchwardens. 

Now in order to safeguard the fund, it is supposed 
that St Paul had with him the following Church- 
wardens when he was leaving Europe : 

Of Beroea : Sopater, son of Pyrrhus (the latter a good 

Macedonian name, but we need not doubt that he 

was a Jew). 
Of Thessalonica : Aristarchus and Secundus. (Jason, of 

this city, was at Corinth when ' Romans ' was written Rom xvi 21. 

He was perhaps left behind at his native city, but 

this is conjecture.) 

Then we come to a difficulty about the reading. 
We have in WH : 

And Gams of Derbe, and Timothy, and of Asia {i.e. 
Ephesians) Tychicus and Trophimus. 

The last line is clear ; but what are we to say of 
Gaius and Timothy? Blass reads : 

And Gains (as a third churchwarden of Thessalonica), 
And of Derbe : Timotheus. 

But what has Derbe to do with the Churches of 
Macedonia and Achaia.-* It is indeed probable that 
Galatia was included in the collection. St. Paul 



implies this ; and by the ' South Galatian ' theory 
iCorxvii Derbe means Galatia. But Ephesus was not in- 
on Ac XX 4. eluded, as Blass observes: so that when the 
' Ephesians ' or ' Asians ' is the geographical name 
prefixed to Tychicus and Trophimus, we are not to 
suppose that they were Churchwardens of Ephesus, 
though they were with the party. 

Now it is usually supposed that Timothy was of 
Lystra, not of Derbe. And rightly so, if we under- 
stand Ac xvi I in its natural sense. But Blass 
rather forces the interpretation of 'these' in xvi I, in 
support of his peculiar arrangement of the names 
in XX 4. 

But even if Timothy were of Derbe, why should 
' Derbaean ' be put so prominently here, in xx 4 ? 
' And the Derbaean, Timothy,' is very strange, for 
we are already familiar with him in Acts, and we 
thought we were familiar with his dwelling at Lystra, 
but Blass would fain even omit the words 'and to 
Lystra' in xvi i, without any authority ! 

In place of this attempt to prove Timothy a man 
of Derbe, let me offer another solution of the 
passage, though a new one. Beroea has its Church- 
warden ; Thessalonica has two ; Corinth perhaps 
has Trophimus, though we may wonder that Titus 
is not named. But Philippi has none. Was Silas 
(Luke) or was Timothy acting for it 1 Perhaps so : 
but in any case I suggest that Gaius of Doberus, on 
the Egnatian road near Philippi, was the special 



Philippian Churchwarden. The list would then con- 
tinue after those of Thessalonica, as follows : 

[Of Philippi : No Philippian but a near neighbour,] the 
Doberian Gaius. (He is the Macedonian of Ac xix 29.) 

This solution meets the case of those who suppose 
that Churchwardens are here intended, and it is 
supported by the first draft of Acts (,8) in the Bezan 
reading, Aov/Sepio^ ' t/te Douberian^ followed by d 
' the Doverian,' and Gigas the Doberian misspelt. 

Historical value of the Western Recension. 

We now pass on to consider the exact movements 
of the party, and it is convenient to place side by 
side the double version of the Acts at this point. 

a (our Acts). /3 (the supposed first draft). 
So having passed three So having passed three Ac xx 3. 

months (in Greece, chiefly at months, he had chosen to sail 

Corinth), when a plot was straight to Syria, and when 

formed against him by the a plot - was formed against 

Jews as he was about to sail him by the Jews, the spirit 

into Syria, he purposed to re- told him to return through 

turn through Macedonia (in- Macedonia, 
stead of sailing across from When then he was about to 

Cenchraea the port of Corinth), go forth., § there were going 

And there was following with before him § as far as Asia 

him (into Asia) S., etc. Sopater, etc. 

Now these having gone before These having gone before 
were tairying for us at Troas. were tarrying for him at Troas. 
§The words between § are purely a conjecture of Blass, but they 
are necessary for the understanding of the expression ' as far as Asia,' 
in the larger sense, meaning Troas. On p, see further chap. viii. 


Blass has shewn how very much clearer the move- 
ments are made in the first draft of Acts. First of 
all, the change of plan was made by St Paul in 
obedience to a prophetic warning.^ ' The (prophetic) 
spirit told him ' is a touch which a omits here as it 
did in xix i, which runs in /3 as follows: 'Now 
when Paul was willing of his own counsel {QeXovToi 
KUTu TTiv ISlav ^ovXriv) to journey to Jerusalem, the 
spirit told him to return into Asia. And having 
gone through the upper parts ' — the highlands of the 
interior of Asia Minor — etc. The whole sentence 
'Now — Asia' is omitted in our draft of Acts, and 
it is, historically speaking, a serious loss. For it 
conveys the reason why he did not fulfil his inten- 
tion of visiting Jerusalem, mentioned in xviii 21. 
I think Blass makes out his case for treating xviii 

^ It has been contended that at this verse, as elsewhere in Acts, we 
have in /3 merely a ' Montanist interpqlation. ' I respectfully suggest 
that the reference to the Spirit here is of the same kind with the remark 
in xvi that thf Spirit of Jesus suffered them not ; and I would claim 
that, if so, Paul and Silas are at least described by a ' Montanist' in 
Acts if they are not ' Montanists ' themselves ! A footnote is not the 
place to embark on this large and fascinating question. I have tried 
to shew in C. P. , chap, ii, what the relation of Montanism was to the 
Christian Church, and that its ideas were survivals in a distorted form 
of the earliest Christian ideas. It would even be possible to hold the 
theory that some passages in Acts were considered Montanist about 
130 A.D. , and were struck out of the author's text as dangerous. It 
could be shewn that /3 is older than a, and that ^ minus a represents 
partly, no doubt, verbiage, omitted for a purely literary improvement 
on the side of brevity, but partly extreme prophetic references which 
were not necessary, as it seejned to the reviser of the Acts. See also 
C.P., page 152, for the view that 2 Peter was also considered dangerous. 


22 as a visit to Caesarea only, and not to Jerusalem 
as most commentators had hitherto supposed the 
words 'went up' to mean. He went no further 
than the 'upper' town of Caesarea, the town as 
distinct from the port. Not a word is said of 
Jerusalem, and to suppose a visit of two days' journey 
thither is to force the words. 

Next, we are on the verge of the We-document 
again here, and we therefore look out for the first 
beginnings of we. It would be easy to suppose that 
if the author of the We-document is the writer of 
a diary and also the writer of Acts, he would 
vacillate as to the exact point in the narrative at 
which he would begin with the we. It is not easy 
to understand this if the author of Acts be a writer 
of the second century, Such a writer would not 
hesitate as to where to put the first person and 
where to put the third. As soon as he came to 
the first, he would put it down on paper. Now 
we find the writer vacillates. According to the 
first draft of Acts represented by D in xx 5 he 
wrote, 'they awaited him (Paul) at Troas.' Thus 
D has preserved for us the absence of a We-state- 
ment. According to the interpretation offered in 
these pages, both this reading and that of our Acts 
are true to fact, since the writer of Acts is with 
St. Paul at the time, and he can as easily say 
' awaited us ' as he can say ' awaited him.' Of 
course it may be said that the divergence of D in 


this place is due to a slip of the pen of the copyist, 
but I do not think that the usual strong character 
of D can be so lightly treated. It is safer to say 
that D means what it says. It is safer to say that 
Silas-Luke, in composing the Acts, not in writing 
his diary, was so much more occupied with St 
Paul's movements, as head of the party, than with 
his own, that he does not care whether he records 
his own companionship or forgathering with St 
Paul, or not. 

The conclusion which it seems fair to draw from 
the passage generally as to the exact movements 
of Silas-Luke is indefinite as to whether he joined 
St Paul at Philippi or not. We cannot say whether 
Sopater and the rest all started from Corinth 
with St Paul to Macedonia. Blass says they went 
before him not only from Macedonia to Asia, but 
from Corinth to Macedonia. It seems to me more 
probable that when the party started from Corinth on 
their long and arduous overland journey, it consisted 
of Paul, Silas, Timothy, Tychicus, Trophimus : that 
Sopater and the rest joined them at Beroea, 
Thessalonica, and Philippi respectively : that at 
Philippi Sopater and the rest went ahead to 
Troas, and that Paul and Silas stayed to complete . 
the days of unleavened bread at Philippi. Here 
again the reference to the observance of the 
ancient Jewish feast, occurring as it does in the 
ordinary course of the writer's own diary, is a 



proof that the writer had been himself a Jew 
and felt the obligation upon himself. It resembles 
the reference to 'the fast' of the day of Atone- Ac xxviiy 
ment, being already past,' in the account of the 
voyage to Rome. 

Luke the Healer, the Beloved. 

The Epistle to the Ephesians mentions only Paul 
in the address, and gives no salutations. Its very 
marked resemblance to i Peter will be dealt with 

The Epistle to the Colossians mentions Paul and 
Timotheus in the address, and it resembles 2 Th and 
I Cor in saying, ' the salutation of me Paul by my 
own hand.' But it has the remarkable salutation of 
' Luke the beloved physician and Demas.' Now the 
almost universal voice of Christendom on this verse 
has said that Luke was a physician, and moderns 
have supported the statement by discovering 
passages in Luke and Acts which shew medical 
knowledge. I have not myself been able to discern 
these traces of medical knowledge in Luke more 
than in Mark, but if they are there, they will also 
very probably be found in Eph iv 16. Are we 
to say that this passage is St Paul's own writing .? 
and that he had derived his knowledge from St Luke 
the anatomist .-' This would be one explanation. 
Or are we to say that, since Luke was definitely 


St Paul's medical adviser, he may have written parts 
of Ephesians himself? The question will be treated 
afterwards. (See particularly 193 n.) Meanwhile 
with all respect, even if Luke were a medical 
adviser, I do not think that St Paul, however much 
he suffered, was so careful of things of the body as 
to specify in a salutation ' the beloved physician,' or 
rather ' Luke the healer, the beloved,' as a term of 
the very highest commendation. If that were all 
the meaning, the tone of this particular remark 
would not be as high as St Paul's tone invariably is. 
I must leave this however to the consideration of 
the reader, and I must urge in any case that 
* physician ' means, as our Collect for St Luke's 
day has beautifully said, that he was a physician 
of the soul, and in this power lay his title to 
St Paul's happy reference. Luke could 'minister 
to a mind diseased,' whether of a Pythoness, 
Ac xvi 1. 6 as the girl at Philippi, or of St Paul himself in 
times of depression, but through the mind he could 
provide healing for the soul. Now St Paul is here 
conveying a spiritual fact, while he plays upon the 
name of Silas. From Silvanus, as we have seen, 
the natural abbreviation would be Silvas ; but by a 
simple vowel-change familiar to all Hebrews the 
name would become Saluas, which might be trans- 
lated healer, which in Greek is undoubtedly larpoi. 
The name Saluas was not then existent : like Sal- 
uator it did not exist before Christ, as St Augustine 


observes. But Saluas is a fair transliteration of the 
Hebrew for 'Three' lisbuj, whence had previously 
come the translated name Tertius. ' Luke the 
healer, the beloved,' should be the translation^ — 

^ In reference to Luke there are 'two passages in the Muratorian 
fragment, both of the very greatest interest. The first is as follows : 

Tertio Edangelii Librum Secando Lucan 

lucas iste medicus post acensum xpi. 

cum eo paulus quasi ut iuris studiosum 

secundum adsumsisset numeni suo 

ex opinione concriset dnm tamen nee ipse 

duidit in came et ide pro asequi potuit 

ita et ad nativitate iohannis incipet dicere. 

Translation. 'The third (tertium) book of the Gospel is that accord- 
ing (secundum) to Luke. Luke the famous physician, after Christ's 
ascension, having been taken by Paul as a student of law to accompany 
him, composed (it) (conscripsit) in his own name (nomine suo) from oral 
tradition : but he never himself saw (vidit) the Lord in the flesh and he 
(idem) too (like Mark) commenced (incepit) his history as far (prout) 
back as he could go, with John (the Baptist), in fact with his birth.' 

Now there is a corruption of this very corrupt MS (see The Christian 
Prophets, 8l, 140, 165, 224, 240, and Westcott On the Canon of N. T. 
App. C. ) in the words tit juris. The ut could not be right after quasi 
which means the same as ut. How shall we restore the reading ? It 
has been suggested that we might translate ' as one zealous for the 
righteousness of the law' as though juris were tqv dtKaiov. But we 
should require ttj^ SiKaioaivris, and jus could not represent this word of 
the Greek original. (There is no doubt that the Mur. frag, is trans- 
lated from Greek). Nor could it = ' scripture. ' Westcott suggests 
virtutis instead of ut iuris, and it is remarkable that Luke in 2 Peter 
and in i Peter uses ap^rl] = virtus of God, but nowhere else : this there- 
fore is a pure coincidence. Tit ii 14 might support it, but not as a 
special feature of Luke. After examining the MS again I am con- 
vinced that the original was in Greek something like us larpelas 
(TirovdaffT^v. (i) For some reason or other the dis airovSaarriv 
translated and the larpdas was only transliterated, perhaps being badly 
written in the Greek original and illegible and so supposed by the 


The 'healer' from his name, his nature, and his 
history alike ; the ' beloved ' from his relation to 
St Paul and also to the brethren. For Demas, 
whom he mentions with him, St Paul has no 
epithet. And his misgivings about him were soon 
to be realized. Surely he would not affect to imply 
that the difference between Luke and Demas was 
that the former was a physician and beloved. He 
would lay the stress upon his spiritual work and 
influence, as he has just been describing that of 
their own special friend and teacher Epaphras. 

The Epistle to Philemon includes Timotheus in 
the address, and contains the salutation of Luke with 
others at the end. Luke is mentioned last, Epaphras 
first, as connected with Colossae where Philemon 

translator, who was certainly very ignorant, to be a proper name, (ii) or 

else the original was ws laTpeLtit d,ya,in]T6v. The words would then 

have been written (lis iarpelaL i,yavi)Tliv 

and have been read as lisei arpMi i,ya.Tn]Tbv 

and translated into QVASi atriai sthdiosvm 

and copied thus qvasi ut iuris stddiosvm 

In the MS the A is written very much like U, and TIURI looks 
very much like trial Thus the Muratorian fragment so far from 
suggesting a legal career for the Apostle Luke, which would be 
absurd, adds nothing to our knowledge of his calling, but only leaves 
him a physician as before, since it follows the tradition based on the 
supposed meaning of Phil iv 14. It is necessaiy to suppose that the 
present copy was removed by at least one copy from the autograph trans- 
lation, but that is in any case a supposition necessary from the condition 
of the single extant MS which is about as old as ' 650, while the 
original is about as old as 200. 

The second passage of the Muratorian Fragment about Luke (Acts) 
has been quoted already above p. 80. 


lived, then ' Marcus, Aristarchus, Demas, Luke, my 
fellow-labourers.' If the curious should enquire why 
Luke should be mentioned last of all, if he were 
really so old and close a friend as Silas, he might 
perhaps be content to think that Luke was the 
amanuensis of this Epistle also, and named himself 
last with his wonted modesty. This I hold to be 
the correct view. 

Luke, the True Yoke-Fellow. 

The Epistle to the Philippians is the latest 
of the ' four that we have from Rome. I 
agree with Ramsay against Lightfoot that the 
evidence of ' the. things which happen to me ' in 
Eph vi 21 is convincing, when taken together with 
the words in vi 19, ' that speech may be given me 
in the opening of my mouth' — i.e. that I may be 
allowed the opportunity of speaking and opening 
my mouth in the open court of the Praetor — -the 
Emperor — himself : and pleading the Gospel cause 
for which I am an ambassador in a chain ; and 
also with the words in Phil i 12, 'the things 
which happened to me,' i.e. his hearing on appeal 
by Caesar himself in the Praetor's Court. The 
' whole Praetorian guard ' must be abandoned as a phii i 13 
translation, and we must read ' the whole of the 
Praetorian retinue, or Court'^ In fact the hearing, 

'See Ramsay, St Paul, etc., quoting Momnisen. 


or a hearing, of the appeal actually took place 
between the writing of Eph vi and that of Phil i, 
and the result was so far favourable that his im- 
prisonment and its cause, the Gospel, became widely 
and clearly known to the higher ranks of Rome. 

But the Epistle to the Philippians does not 
mention Silvanus, and its address is from Paul and 
Timotheus. The apparent absence of any reference 
to Luke by name in the Epistle has been mentioned 
before.^ But I think that the most probable inter- 

phii iv 3. pretation of " true yoke-fellow ' is that which makes 
it to mean Silas. The words and their context 
appear to imply that the true yokefellow was the 
closest of all St Paul's companions, that he was 
sent on a special mission of some delicacy and, 
as regards the women mentioned, of some difficulty, 
and that the writer, while recognising their many 

Ph ii 25-30. and great services and Clement's also, gave Epaphro- 
ditus a place of the highest esteem and affection. 
There is force in Lightfoot's remark that ' true ■ 
yoke-fellow' means Epaphroditus, the bearer of the 
letter, because in his case alone there would be no 
risk of making the reference unintelligible by the 
suppression of the name. But on the other hand we 
must not forget the full force of ' yoke-fellow,' which 
is far more than any one of the terms applied to 

Ph ii 25. Epaphroditus, ' brother, fellow-worker, fellow-soldier.' 
Brother is one of the brethren, who were now many ; 

ip. 87. 



the other two terms are applicable to all brethren 

who were enlisted in St Paul's work generally. But 

' yoke-fellow ' implies that there was one, and one 

only, who had borne a particular yoke and endured 

a particular burden, since only two beasts bore a 

yoke together. The word is a specially prophetic 

term. When St Paul repeated the words, ' It is Ac xxvi 14. 

hard for thee to kick against the goad,' he bethought 

him of his condition as a yoke-bearing beast. I 

think too it implies that he was a Prophet before 

he was a Christian. Lightfoot therefore, on Phil iv 

3, hardly does justice to the expression. 'Thy toilApUz. 

and thy endurance' in the Epistle to the Angel of 

the Church in Ephesus suggests the same thought 

of the toiling ox. ' Take my yoke upon you ' is 

itself part of the same image and nothing else. The Mtxi29. 

^C XV 10 

yoke of the slave is rather different; for though Gaivi. 
'slave' was especially a favourite term with the 
prophets, slaves less often bore the yoke in pairs. 
We seem then drawn to the conclusion that Silas 
alone can be here intended. And if the Philippians 
had not forgotten how Paul and Silas had once had 
their feet fast in the stocks, they would not mistake 
who most deserved the name of ' true yoke-fellow ' 
{yvr\(Tit. (Tv^vye) to St Paul. We may conclude that 
Silas went from Rome to Philippi, and returned to 
St Paul at Rome. This he could have done within 
three months. 

Almost the last extant sentence of St Paul is 2 Tim iv n. 


that to Timothy, 'only Luke is with me.'i This is 
the only reference to Luke or to Silvanus in the 
three Pastoral Epistles. 

Luke is Silvanus and Silas. 

Thus the alternate appearance of Luke and of 
Silas has run to its full circle in the Epistles of St 
Paul. What a strange fact that we can never find 
the two in the same place together, whether we 
look through the optic glass of St Paul or that of 
the writer of the Acts ! Timotheus and Titus, 
Trophimus and Tychicus, all have their points of 
mutual contact, which preclude their being identified 
with one another, but as to Luke and Silas, we are 
tempted to parody a famous line and say — if 
disappearance from the scene of action is a sort 
of death — 

Sic Lucam Silas alterna morte redemit ! 

The evidence is quite enough so far to justify 
the challenge, that they must be proved to be two 
men, or we must hold them to be one. I am unable 
to find any one ground for believing them to be 
two. Perhaps the above discussion may gave rise 

1 Godet, Comm. on St Luke, i 21 commends Thiersch's conjecture as 
ingenious, that the reference which follows almost immediately, ' Bring 
with thee the books, but especially the parchments,' shows that St Paul 
-was then occupied in some literary labour requiring these MSS. 


to the discovery of some sort of proof that they 
are two. Tradition on this point is of no value. 
But before concluding this chapter there is some- 
thing more to add. 

On a previous occasion the present writer was 
led by an examination of 2 Peter, apart from 
I Peter, to conclude that it was written by an 
enthusiastic Prophet, under the immediate direction 
of St Peter, in his infirmity and old age, at Rome, 
to Romans ; and that this Prophet was St Luke. 
Little did it occur to him when he was led to that 
conclusion, that it would ever prove that Luke was 
Silas. But it remains to put this whole argument 
to two more tests by asking first the plain question : 
Does the word eypa-\f/-a in i Peter v I2 mean 'I 
write ' or ' I send ' .■■ In teaching our fourth-form 
boys we say it is ' I write ' and eVe/^n^a is ' I send.' 
Thus we have St Peter clearly stating here : 
' I write this Epistle to you by the agency of 
Silvanus, the faithful brother as I account him.' Yet 
the almost universal voice of antiquity and to-day 
declares that 'eypa\j/a here means ' I send.' Writers 
insist on maintaining that i Peter was borne by 
Silvanus round the coasts of Asia Minor. They 
seem to think of Silvanus as Antony thought of 

Lepidus : 

This is a slight unmeritable man, 
Meet to be sent on errands ! 

As long as they maintain this, they will chng to 


their tenet, however unable to prove the duality of 
Luke and Silas. But some day the scales will 
fall from their eyes, and they will admit that here 
as elsewhere eypa^p-a means I write. Silas is 
Luke, and wrote i Peter, as he wrote 2 Peter, for 
and with and in the name of the Apostle Peter, 
who never became a Greek scholar equal to the 
free idiomatic Greek of those Epistles, but yet 
wished to send epistles in his own name from Rome 
and the neighbourhood of Rome to the brethren 
after St Paul's manner. 

The other question^ is that ancient one of the 
relation of Jude to 2 Peter: What was it.'' The 
plain answer I now suggest is 'Judas and Silas 
Ac XV 32. being Prophets also themselves,' used naturally one 
and the same syllabus of teaching in the early days. 
Accordingly in 2 Peter ii we have the version of 
Silas, which is more especially, that is more so than 
2 Peter i and iii, his very own, and yet most closely 
allied to that of his former 'true yoke-fellow' Judas 
or Jude. But this question has to be discussed at a 
later page below. 

■' The Christian Prophets, pp. 149-163. 



We pass from the scattered notices of the move- 
ments of Luke in Acts and the Pauline Epistles to 
-the consideration of his thoughts as exhibited in 
the Petrine Epistles. If the prudent reader be 
surprised at this invitation, and if he resent the 
assumption that is couched in the foregoing words, 
I can only ask him whether he is prepared to 
steel himself against the elementary knowledge that 
eypa\p-a most naturally means " I write." Peter 
says /le writes by the agency of Silvanus, whom 
nearly all readers have hitherto willingly and well 
admitted to be Silas. The preceding pages have 
tended to prove that Silas is Luke : and the 
inference that Silas wrote the Third Gospel is 
fruitfully suggestive of many lines of thought, which, 
however, cannot be pursued now. At present we 
are concerned with the clear statement of Peter i Pet v 12 
himself, and we seek to test it further in connexion 
with the results of the three previous chapters, and 


also in connexion with a result which the present 
writer has tried to set forth ^ that 2 Peter proves 
itself by internal evidence— and this is the only 
evidence available — to be by the hand that wrote 
Luke and Acts. 

Style of the Petrine Epistles. 

There is, without a doubt, some diversity of 
style between i Peter and 2 Peter, on which com- 
mentators have often enlarged, and on which some 
further remarks will be offered later. A divergence 
of style will strike any student either more or less 
at different times of reading, and with more or less 
use of the Greek Concordance. A divergence of 
style will occasionally shew itself between different 
writings which are acknowledged to be by the 
same hand. A chapter here or there in a single 
writing of St Paul, or even chapter ii of 2 Peter, 
no less than passages in secular writers, will strike 
the reader sometimes as betraying different author- 
ship from that of the context. Style is a hard 
thing to come by, and there is room for great 
variety of opinion upon it. Still when the style 
is taken together with the underlying thought, 
when the expression is allowed to be pregnant 
with meaning, and when the meaning is carefully 

1 The Christian Frophe/s, pp. 157 ff. 


considered and referred to its original, fount of 
inspiration, we cannot fail to find some guidance 
to the authorship. And it is only fair to ask that 
every phenomenon of the works in question should 
be regarded, both in itself, and in relation to other 
phenomena, and that judgment should go by the 
fullest and ripest consideration of all together. 
Tradition there is virtually none. When we find 
it we ought to be willing to count it for what it is 
worth. Only the chain of tradition must not 
desert us for 75 years after the date at which it 
is contended that the works were written. Such a 
breach, or anything like such a breach, is fatal to 
the value of tradition. 

2 Peter ' ambitious ' in style. 

Two further preliminary remarks may be here 
made with regard to style. Dr. Chase, in his article 
on 2 Peter,^ has observed that the style of 2 Peter 
is ' ambitious.' I note that Dr. Plummer says of 
the style of St Luke's Gospel ^ that it is 
' ambitious.' I would no more hesitate to say with 
Antony of Brutus, that both Doctors are ' honour- 
able men,' than to say that Dr. Chase and 
Dr. Plummer wrote independently of each other, 

1 Hastings' Diet. Bible. 

^ Int. to Critical Commentary on St Ltike. 


about the. same time, concerning their respective 
authors' style, and without a thought of the identity 
of authorship for the Third Gospel and the Second 
Epistle of Peter. Yet it is strange that, like 
Antony's Brutus, they should both consider that 
their authors were 'ambitious.' I almost begin to 
think that in style Silas was ' ambitious.' But 
when we further ask, What is 'ambitious'? the 
answer is not so easy. Let us hope that the 
dangerous epithet may be somehow reduced to its 
true proportions as we proceed in our enquiry. 

Quotations of O. T. in the Petrine Epistles. 

The other observation refers to a more tangible 
piece of evidence, the number of quotations from 
the O.T. which can be identified in i Peter and 
2 Peter respectively. There is no doubt that a 
writer, even in the very rare position of embodying 
a friend's thoughts and expressing them in words 
for him, as I have been led to think that Luke 
did for Peter, tends to revert to certain favourite 
works and passages of original Suggestion. Sir Walter 
Scott will hardly write a novel without its containing 
a reference to magical arts and witchcraft somewhere 
or other. Ex pede Hercuiem. The pes will leave 
its print upon the familiar citation. Let us see then 
how the case stands between the two Petrine Epistles. 


A cursory glance at the O.T. quotations in i 
Peter compared with those in 2 Peter, as collected 
in Westcott's and Hort's edition (1881), will shew 
a remarkable contrast in point of number. The 
former contains in its seven pages no less than 
36 quotations ; the latter contains in its four pages 
and a quarter only 6 quotations. This difference 
has been alleged as an indication of separate 
authorship for the two epistles. But if we look 
again, we shall observe that while 2 Peter quotes 
from three O.T. books only, Isaiah (both I and II), 
Psalms, and Proverbs, the predominant quotations 
in I Peter are from those very three books ; 
namely, Isaiah (II), giving 6 quotations, Isaiah (I) 5, 
Psalms 8, Proverbs 5. Twenty-four out of the 
thirty-six are thus accounted for, and in point of 
length they are considerably longer than the 
remaining twelve. Moreover these twelve may 
be reduced to eight by not counting repetitions. 
Th^re is therefore a very remarkable agreement 
between the two epistles in point of proportion in 
their O.T. quotations. This is undeniable, but it 
will, I think, be admitted that it is a kind of 
agreement which is naturally explained only by 
supposing identity of authorship for the two 
Epistles, and that it is the very l^z'c which any 
forger, or simulator, or imitator, would di-eam of 
manufacturing as a means of recommending his 
work under a false title. ■ 


The position of the Christian Prophets in i Peter. 

Let us then at once proceed to examine the attitude 
of I Peter to the Christian Prophets as a then living 
power in the Church. We very soon come upon a 
crucial passage in i Pet i 10-12. This must refer 
to Christian prophets as well as to O.T. prophets. 
We first observe that the O.T. prophets cannot be 
said to 'search out,' (e^epavvav, but this was the 
special work and function of the Christian prophets 
as of all who looked for Messiah's coming. Thus 

jnv39. our Lord said : ' Ye (Jews who know the Bible) search 
the Scriptures, for ye think in them to have eternal 
life ; and they (if ye read them aright) are they 

jn vii 52. which witness about me.' ' Search (the Scriptures) 
and see that a prophet doth not arise out of Galilee.' 

I Cor ii 10. Again St Paul says: — 'The (prophetic) spirit, the 
agency by which God made revelation to prophets, 
searcheth all things, even the deep things of God.' 
Consequently we, the Prophets, do now ' speak not 
by words taught of human wisdom, but taught of 
the Spirit, spiritually taught, critically comparing 
(a-v/KpivovTe^) spiritual things with spiritual . . . 
corii 16. and we have Messiah's mind.' 

The word ' ecstasy ' is not used in the passage 
I Pet i, but it is implied in the two very strong 
words e^e^tirrjcrav Koi e^r/pavvrjcrav ; in their seeking 
out and searching out of the scriptures the Prophets 


1 19 

must needs be taken out of themselves in abstract 
thought ; they must needs pass through the condition 
of ecstasy ; thus they received their revelation or 
apocalypse. The object of their search was ' to i Cor h 12. 
find in reference to what time, or failing that, what 
sort of crisis ^ the Messiah-spirit which in them was Cor ii n. 
making its revelation clear. The Spirit is the same 
that used to testify (" was protesting," Hort) before- 
hand of the sufferings which were to extend to 
Messiah and to be fulfilled in Him, with the glories 
that should follow. To the Christian prophets was 
revelation (thus) made, because ' (the A.V. translation 
"that" is quite wrong) 'they were ministering the 

' Of course Dr Hort's learned notes will be studied on this passage. 
Unfortunately he has not elucidated the sense, if there be any, in the 
idea that O.T. prophets could 'seek out and search out.' He says: 
' St Peter doubtless found the evidence for this seeking and searching 
in the prophecies themselves.' (p. 49b). He then goes on to say; 
' It is a remarkable illustration of this chasm in O. T. prophecy, 
that, when St Paul is wishing in Rom. and Gal. to justify out of the 
O.T. his doctrine of salvation by faith, the one text from the prophets 
which he is able to adduce is Hab ii 4 ; his other great proof-text being 
the Pentateuchal saying about Abraham. ' I really must demur to this 
statement of St Paul's ability. Was he really unable to find anything 
else in the Pentateuch, in the Psalms, in the Prophets on this subject ? 
I cannot think so, especially when I read in Rom ix 33 that he has 
actually quoted Is xxviii 16. So far does the authority of Dr Hort's 
great name and marvellous learning carry us away, that criticism is 
awed and hushed for a time, then it awakens to the fact that no man is 
always at his best — plerumque bonus dormitat et Hortus — and that post- 
humous works especially require the most careful scrutiny. We may 
observe that St Paul has chosen in Gen xv 6 and Hab ii 4 two texts 
which fairly represent the beginning and the end of the O.T.— the 
sacred volume from cover to cover. 


things revealed, not for themselves but for you, and 
they were announced unto you through them that 
preached the gospel unto you by the Holy Ghost 
sent forth from heaven.' 

The O.T. Prophets did not seek out their own 

The present writer finds himself unable to make 
sense of this passage if it be supposed, with Hort 
'and others, that the O.T. Prophets are intended. 
For it would require to be shewn, what Hort says 
that ' St Peter doubtless found the evidence for,' 
that the O.T. Prophets did seek and search in their 
own prophecies. If they did so, would it be im- 
possible for us to find some trace of such seeking 
and searching? But this, or anything like it, is 
nowhere to be found .■" The O.T. Prophets do not 
betray the smallest desire to search in their own 
prophecies for anything hidden. Nor do they shew 
an inability to find an object of search. They have 
never wrapped up any truth in obscure language 
in order that they may themselves discover it again. 
These are still some O.T. prophecies awaiting elucida- 
tion by us — and they are comparatively very few — 
prophecies of which we seek and search for the true 
meaning, prophecies of which perhaps no clue can 
be safely and certainly found- to the fulfilment or 


even to the origin. But the seeking and the searching 
is ours alone. Where can we find the least proof 
that it was ever undertaken by the authors? It 
would be indeed a strange position that a Prophet 
in trumpet tones should deliver his prophecy, and 
then forthwith set to work to discover its meaning. 
He lifted up his voice and said, 'Hear, O heavens, is i 2. 
give ear, O earth : for the Lord hath spoken.' Are 
we to believe that this direct and divine message 
is one which he must at once sit down to unravel 
the meaning of.' How helpless and even ridiculous 
would be the condition of the Prophet who called 
heaven and earth to hear a message which he could not 
understand himself, and must seek out and search out 
the season or crisis— a tinie of the far-distant future — 
or^ failing that, the kind of season, to which it 
applied ! 

It cannot be too often asserted, that the O.T. 
Prophets delivered a clear, direct, intelligible message 
to the men of their own time. ' Go and cry in 
the ears of Jerusalem, saying' is not a command jerii 2. 
that can possibly be followed by such words as ' what 
thou canst not understand.' The charge to Ezekiel, 
' I do send thee unto them, and thou shalt say ez u 4. 
unto them. Thus saith the Lord God,' implies clearly 
enough that the hearers, ' though they be a rebellious 
house,' can hear if they choose; they are notEziiis. 
barbarians, like them of Tyre and Sidon ; had they 
been so, they would have hearkened :— they are 


Ez 11126 .his ov/n people, to whom his rebuke is plain enough. 
Even the visions, which are in detail perhaps per- 
plexing to us, were clear to the prophet himself, 
and are to be interpreted by his own environment. 
What depth of further and secondary meaning they 
and all his prophecies may bear for us is another 
question : the Prophet, who foresaw the immediate 
future, had no knowledge of the historical details 
of the distant future. He could not ascertain them 
and did not profess to know them. Moses and 
David, Isaiah and Ezekiel, were wholly unconscious 
of any further meaning than that which they con- 
veyed to their present and immediate hearers. Had 
they been conscious of anything further, they would 
have been lifted above the limitations of human 
nature, and their miraculous powers would, to use 
Bp Westcott's words on another prophetic subject, 
have ' introduced confusion into life.' 

The Angels looking down into the fulfilments. 

It may be urged, however, that this is what the 
prophets of O.T. were and are said in i Pet i 12 to 
have been, — lifted above the limitations of human 
nature, nay above those of angelic nature,^ ' which 
things (even) angels desire to look down into.' The 
words must now be considered. Hort points out 
'Cf. I Cor vi 3, 'we shall judge angels.' 



that these things, upon which the angels in heaven 
look down, must therefore be on earth, not in heaven. 
It cannot be doubted that this is the meaning. And 
he refers to Enoch ix i : ' And when the four 
great archangels Michael and Uriel and Raphael and 
Gabriel heard it, they looked down (TrapeKV^rav eirl) 
upon the earth from the holy ones of heaven.' 1 This 
is undoubtedly the origin of the expression in i Pet 
i 12, as Hort says, and we thus have one more proof 
of the free use of apocalyptic uncanonical works 
by Silvanus-Luke in writing i Peter, as we have in 
his companion Jude. Hort then goes on to say 
that the things ' which angels desire to look into ' 
cannot be the historical contents of the Gospel 
message, because the necessary key to that was the 
final exaltation, which is in heaven, and he limits 
the meaning to the 'grace' and 'salvation' extended 
to the Gentiles. The limitation appears perhaps 
somewhat too strict, but let it pass. He proceeds : 
" But this manifestation of grace drew down the 
eyes of angels less as a present fact than as a 
promise of the future : they recognised the fulfil- 
ment of prophecy as itself a larger prophecy, subject 
to the necessary conditions of prophecy and pre- 
eminently partaking of its mysteriousness." This 

•'For the general idea of the angels desiring to know the future, 

we may further compare Enoch cviii 7, ' For some of them are 

written and inscribed above in the heavens in order that the 

angels may read them and know that which will befall the sinners 
and the spirits of the humble. ..." 



indeed is a paradox ; prophecy fulfilled is prophecy 
unfulfilled : it never is fulfilled ! It is like the 
Camelot of which the old seer so finely said : — 

For an ye heard a music, like enow 

They are building still, seeing the city is built 

To music, therefore never built at all, 

And therefore built for ever.^ 

But the old seer was not exactly an O.T. Prophet. 
Nor did Dr Hort mean what Tennyson means. He 
meant that the primary fulfilment of O.T. prophecy 
was itself a prophecy, and mysterious, and awaited in 
turn, its fulfilment. We may agree so far as to say 
that every O.T. prophecy has («) its fulfilment which 
we may call primary, and this is its application to 
the immediate circumstances of the time at which 
it was uttered ; and {b) its fulfilment which we 
may call secondary, and this is its application by 
the Christian Prophets to the circumstances of their 
later time. Any other fulfilment of O.T. prophecy 
is a matter which theology, so far at least as the 
present writer and the present treatise are- con- 
cerned, must set on one side for the present. It 
is plain that all inferences. drawn from Daniel and 
Revelation as to the nearness of the last things in 
the year 1900 A.D. belong to a special province of 
eschatological study and must be regarded apart, 
however important the issues and however unmis- 

' Tennyson, Gareih. and Lynette 



takeable the signs. Now the point where Dr Hort 
seems to invite controversy is his remark that the 
fulfilment of prophecy, by which I think he means 
its primary fulfilment, is itself a larger prophecy. 
We must, for purposes of scriptural theology, ask 
the question, To whom is it a larger prophecy ? 
And if the answer is, to the O.T. Prophets them- 
selves, then we must say, as was said before, that 
there is absolutely no trace of this, and the idea 
is untenable until abundant .proof of it is furnished 
from their writings. If the answer should be, on the 
other hand, to the Christian Prophets, then we must 
reply that it has been shewn elsewhere that they 
wholly ignored the primary fulfilment and wholly 
concerned themselves with the words of the original 
O.T. prophecy.^ Their belief was that the O.T. 
Prophets were animated by the Messiah-spirit, usually 
translated ' the Spirit of Christ,' and that they them- 
selves were moved by the same. They held the 
doctrine of the unity and continuity of the spirit of 
prophecy. Their function was to ' seek out and 
search out in reference to what time, or failing that, 
what sort of time the Messiah-spirit was making 
clear ' its revelations. When it was clear, they must 
declare it as evangelists and carry it abroad as Mis- 
sionary Apostles. They maintained that the appli- 
cation, when found and approved by the rules of 
their order, which were divine in their origin and 
^ The Christian Prophets, pp. 62 ff. 


exercise, was clear,— so clear that the salvation of 
the world depended on the announcement and 
acceptance of it as the good tidings. Consequently 
Dr Hort's words seem to require that instead of 
'the angels recognised the fulfilment of prophecy as 
itself a larger ^ prophecy,' we should say ' the angels 
recognised O.T. prophecy as itself of larger or 
secondary application.' The things which angels 
desire to look down into are the larger or secondary 
applications by Christian Prophets of O.T. prophecy. 
We thus have a very clear meaning of the whole 
passage, and but for the interposition of centuries 
of commentators ignoring Christian prophecy and 
Christian Prophets, it would have been always 

O.T. Prophecy is free from ^hidden suggestions! 

But we have not yet done with Dr Hort's com- 
mentary. He says that the word eSrjXov, ' was dis- 
closing ' (Hort) — ■' did point unto ' (R.V.), ' did signify ' 
(A.V.) — is a strange word prima facie. Now .any 
ordinary Greek scholar would say it was a plain 
word, a common word, an easy word prima facie. 

1 The expression of Clem. R. Cor 5 that ' Paul went unto the holy 
place having been found a notable pattern {v7roypafj.i/,6s) of patient 
endurance' is hardly a support of this statement, though the word 
is used I Pet ii 21 of Christ. 



It is a very common word indeed, and we have 
learned it ever since our Aesop's fables, ' The fable 
shews,' ' makes clear.' Says Dr Hort : " It is still 
more often used of any indirect ^ kind of communi- 
cation. . . . Thus it might stand for faint half- 
hidden suggestions of the spirit in the midst of its 
clearer notifications." Indirect it may be — for speech 
and writing are indirect sometimes — but absolutely 
clear it is, and free from all concealment and ' half- 
hidden suggestions.' St Luke was a classical scholar, 
and we do not begin again to read the scores of 
references in Liddell and Scott in order to test 
whether SrjXos, SrjXow, can imply 'half-hidden sug- 
gestions' which are supposed to be imported by 
their authors, or which their authors are ' to seek out 
and to search out ' of their own utterances. The 
power which some people possess of seeing diffi- 
culties where there are none is far greater than any 
man's power of solving true difficulties. But we 
may best uphold the laws of the Greek language 
and general intelligence by maintaining that eSrjXov 
means ' was shewing clearly.' He who is loyal to 
the e.ssence of truth will be resolved to take the 
consequences of his acts and words, though he may 

^ It is interesting to contrast a remark of Zahn (Einl. ii, p. 54) on 
the same word eS-fi\a<rev in 2 Pet i 14. He says : ' This straight- 
forward expression does not point -to a miraculous revelation.' It 
would seem possible that it should apply so, but Zahn is right in 
proposing the other meaning. In any case it means ' clearly 


seem to wear a disguise, as Gareth did of old- in 

Tennyson's Idyll, when 

the Seer replied, 
' Know ye not then the Riddling of the Bards : 
" Confusion, and illusion, and relation. 
Elusion, and occasion, and evasion?" 
I mock thee not but as thou mockest me . . . 
And now thou goest up to mock the King, 
Who cannot brook the shadow of any lie.' 

Never was anyone more absolutely free from the 
shadow of any He than the great critic and beloved 
and venerable man, whose words are under dis- 
cussion ; but when he wrote this portion of his 
commentary he must have been sore bestead by the 
Riddling of the Bards, or he would not have thus 
understated the ability of St Paul. ?rom one 
erroneous step he has passed to another, till he is 
well-nigh lost in those terrible Abstractions of Tenny- 
son's old seer. The angels have no desire to look 
down from heaven upon such Abstractions as these, 
but the things which, according to i Peter, they 
desire to see are the effect of the Good Tidings 
on the earth, the unfolding of the purpose of God 
among Jews and Gentiles, the ever-widening circle of 
the Church holy unto the Lord, the springing of that 
stately Palace or City built upon the foundation of 
the apostles and prophets, till 'tipt with lessening- 
peak and pinnacle,' they ' made it spire to heaven.' ^ 

^This grand prophetic Image which has so profoundly impressed 
St Luke, St Peter, and St Paul will be dealt with below. It originates 
in O.T,, but receives definite shape in the Book of Enoch. 



Christian Prophecy recognised in i Peter and 2 Peter. 

What relation then does this passage bear to the 
passage on Prophecy in 2 Peter i ? "^ We have seen 
that in both cases prophecy is aHve, and Christian. 
On no other ground is either passage capable of 
reasonable interpretation. First : in i Peter i the 
Prophets continue to 'seek out and search out' of 
the Scriptures of O.T. the will of God as shewn 
in texts, of which they were and are to find ful- 
filments. In 2 Peter i the readers, who are not in 
the first instance the same as those of i Peter, are 
warned that private interpretation of the O.T. proves 
to be impossible, that the interpretation is limited 
to Christian Prophets endowed with the Holy Spirit, 
that the Prophets of old themselves only spake 
when moved by the Spirit ; hence false prophets 
are a snare and a danger, and will be punished. 
Next : in i Peter we are told of a Messiah-spirit 
animating and possessing the Christian prophets as 
it possessed the O.T. prophets. In 2 Peter we 
are told of a Holy Spirit which bore or carried 
them. There is no difference here but one of form 
and metaphor. Lastly, we learn from i Peter that 
the revelation was made to Prophets because they 
were the body entrusted with the ministration of 
its contents and bound in duty to pass them on as 

^See The Christian Prophets, p. 15S ff. 


the gospel, by means of the preachers who announced 
them to the readers. And from 2 Peter we learn 
that no usurpation of prophetic powers is lawful, 
though the prophets now, as of old, are human 
: Pet i 21. beings, and the last word ' men ' is not without its 

Use of Apocryphal Books in i Peter and 2 Peter. 

The next point which engages our notice is the 
attitude which is adopted by i Peter and by 2 
Peter respectively towards Apocryphal books. The 
Book of Enoch was highly esteemed by Jude, wh6 
has quoted from it once and referred to it once. 
And if Luke were really the author of i Peter 
and of 2 Peter, and had been the close companion 
in apostleship of Jude, it would be strange if he 
could write in such a similar strain to Jude's without 
any use of the venerated book which Jude supposed 
to be so ancient. After agreeing so closely with 
Jude on the six heads of ungodliness as to treat 
of them in exactly the same order ;^ after enter- 
taining and propounding the same intention with 
Jude to compose a larger work concerning the 
common salvation ; after resolving to put forward 

^Cf. Ez xxxiv 31, 'And ye, my flock, the flock of my pasture, 
are men.' Heb and LXX Codex Marchalianus. 
^ This question is worked out below, chap. vii. 



his present ad interim writing exactly as Jude did, 
the writer of 2 Peter must have entertained, we 
should suppose, a decided conviction adverse to the 
Book of Enoch if he entirely passed it by : and if 
he quoted it, then he would be one degree removed 
from the writer of i Peter if the latter shewed 
no trace of its influence. If there is a resemblance 
between i Peter and 2 Peter in their quotations 
of O.T., we may expect to find a resemblance in 
their references to non-canonical works. 

The Water of the Deluge. 

Let us see whether in this expectation we shall 
be disappointed. The two passages which are first 
to be compared are as follows: 

I P ii 18 ff. Because even Christ died for sins 
once, the righteous on behalf of the unrighteous, in 
order that he may lead us unto God; put to death 
in flesh, but quickened in spirit; by which also he 
went and preached to the spirits in prison, who 
had been disobedient aforetime when the long- 
suffering of God was earnestly waiting in Noah's 
days while an ark was a-preparing into which a 
few, that is eight souls, (entered and) were carried 
safely through by means of water. Which water 
(or rather its) antitype now saves you, (I mean) 
baptism, not the putting away, etc. . . . 


2 P iii S- For they willingly ignore the fact 
that there were heavens of old and (dry) land com- 
pacted out of water and through water by the word 
of God, through which waters the then world was 
inundated and perished : But the present heavens and 
the earth have by the same word been treasured 
up for fire, being reserved unto a day of judgment 
and destruction of ungodly men. 

To deal first with the latter passage. The account 
of the creation here given is based on Genesis. The 
Genii-ii. 'compacted' earth, or rather land, represents a word 
Gen i IT. in LXX : 'The compactions of the waters he called 
seas.' The word is not applied in Genesis LXX to 
the land, but the analogy is obvious. The land was 
compacted out of the water, because 'the water 
under the heaven was to be gathered into one 
gathering for the dry land to appear.' It was 
compacted through (that is, by a division of) water, 
because the waters beneath the firmament had first 
to be divided from the waters above the firma- 
ment. The account of the Deluge, ' through which 
waters . . . ,' is also based on Genesis, where it is 
Genviiii said that there was a combination of the waters 
below and those above. . ' The fountains of the 
abyss were broken (up) and the cataracts of heaven 
were opened.' 


The Fire of the Destruction of the Earth. 

At this point, however, we cease to find the basis 
for 2 Peter in the O.T. There is indeed a passage 
in Isaiah where the wrath of the Lord falls upon all is xxxiv 4. 
the nations, but it does not speak of fire. Rather 
the contrary is implied. ' All the (starry) powers 
of heaven shall wither, the heaven shall be rolled 
like a book, and all the constellations shall fall 
like leaves from a vine, and as leaves fall from 
a figtree ' (LXX). This passage seems to imply 
rather the extinction of such fire as there is in the 

There is another passage from which 2 Peter 

might have drawn its language, in the Song of 

Moses: 'A fire is kindled in mine anger, and shall oem xxxu 

turn unto the lowest hell, and shall consume the 

earth with her increase, and set on fire the founda- 
tions of the mountains.' Here the original reference 
is not to the destruction of the heavens and the 
earth, but to that of the land of rebellious Jeshurun. 
Yet this fact would not have prevented it from 
being applied by 2 Peter, since, as we have seen, 
the original circumstances of a Scripture are not 
regarded,! and often doubtless were not known, by 
the Christian Prophet who used the language of it. 
But there is no trace of this passage being before 
' See The Christian Prophets., pp. 63 ff. 


the mind of 2 Peter,i and the omission to quote is 
all the more remarkable. 

From whence, then, is the thought of the fiery 
destruction drawn, together with the language in 
which it is clothed ? We may confidently say that 
there is a passage in our present Book of Enoch — 
though perhaps it has no right to be there, being 

Enixvii. a Noachic interpolation^ — which has greatly influ- 
enced 2 Peter : ' But (8) these waters will in those 
days serve for the Kings ... for the punishment 
of the spirit, because their spirit is full of lust, that 
they may be punished in their body ; for they have 

sPetiii. denied the Lord of Spirits ... (13) Because these 
waters of judgment minister to the healing of the 
body of the kings and to the best of their body ; 
therefore they will not see and will not believe 
that those waters will change and become a fire 
which burns for ever.' 

Another passage is the concluding chapter of the 

En cviii 3, 5. Book : ' They will burn with fire where there is no 
earth.' ... ' What is this shining thing? for it is not 
a heaven but only the flame of a burning fire' Both 
texts undoubtedly describe a kind of hell, but we note 
that both earth and heaven have given place to fire. 
Again, while 2 Peter iii 10 says : ' The elements 

En i 4 f. shall melt with fervent Iieat,' Enoch says : ' The 

' TriKbixevoi indeed occurs in Deut xxxii 24, but only of men wasting 
with hunger. T^Kerai, is a quotation from Isaiah, I.e. 
^ See Charles, Book of Enoch, p. 169. 


Holy and Great One will come forth from his 
dwelling, the God of the world. And ... He will 
tread on Mount Sinai . . . and the high mountains 
will be shaken, and the high hills will be made 
low, and will melt like wax before the flame.' 

Again : ' And in those days when the Most High En cu i. 
brings a grievous fire upon you, whither will ye flee 
and where will ye find deliverance ? ' There seems 
to be a reference to this in i Pet i 7, ' that the trial 
of your faith . . . with fire', etc. 

Again : ' In those days the nations will be stirred En xcix 4. 

En xci 14. 

Up and the families of the nations will arise on the 
day of destruction'. So also : ' And all the world 
will be written down'^ for destruction.' 

Again : ' And in those days will the earth also En u i. 
give back those who are treasured up within it.' 

Again, while 2 Peter iii 10 says : ' The heavens 
shall pass away with a great noise,' Enoch says : En ix i. 
' I saw how the heaven of heavens quaked with a 
great earthquake (sic)! He has said just before : ' I 
saw the secrets of the thunder and how the peal 
thereof is heard and how ... it serves for a curse 
before the Lord of Spirits.' 

^The parallel to this in 2 Peter is the strange expression in iii 10 
which WH print as eipeSiitTeTai.. On this Hort observes (Int. N. T. 
§ 365) : ' It fully accounts for all other four readings, while no other 
reading will. . . . Yet it is hardly less certain by intrinsic probability 
that eyp. cannot be right. ... It is the parent of the rest, and yet 
itself corrupt. ' I suggest that 7pa0i)(r6Tai, will be written, is the lost 


Again, while 2 Peter iii 1 3 says : ' But we await 
new heavens and a new earth according to his 
promise, wherein dwelleth righteousness.' Enoch 
En xci 16. had said : ' And the first heaven will depart and 
pass away, and a new heaven will appear, and all 
the powers of the heavens will shine sevenfold for 
ever. And after that there will be many weeks 
without number for ever in goodness and righteous- 
ness, and sin will no more be mentioned for ever.' 

Thus, although there is not a single quotation of 
any length from Enoch in 2 Peter, it is not too much 
to say that many elementary ideas of the later work 
are found in the former, which has profoundly in- 
fluenced St Luke, as we have seen that it influenced 
Jude. Anyone who reads the Book of Enoch would 
draw from it the idea that fire was to play a most 
important and overwhelming part in the future of 
the world, whether it emanated from the sulphur 
En xxiii 2. springs of Palestine, or from the cities of the Plain, 
or from the ceaseless river of fire that ran regularly 
in the west, towards the end of the earth. There 
is indeed so much said about fire that it is almost 
surprising to find in Enoch no distinct and straight- 
forward declaration of fire as the final means of 
destruction, the more so because it is implied per- 
is ne. ha,ps in Isaiah once, and Zephaniah comes near it. 

Zeph iii 8. 

This concludmg touch was left for the hand of 
Luke to put on paper. 


The Water of the Destruction of the Earth. 

Again the frequency of references to Noah in the 
Book of Enoch, and the fulness of the details of 
the deluge, will suffice to explain to any reader 
why both i Peter and 2 Peter have agreed in dwell- 
ing upon the destruction of the world by water. 
To our modern notions the reference must appear 
forced and far-fetched in both cases. For in 
2 Peter it is obvious that ' the world ' in its proper 
sense must include the fair order of the heaven as 
well as the earth or land and the sea. But the 
heaven was not destroyed at all, and we cannot say 
that the sea perished either. There is therefore a 
failure of the contrast, when in the future it is fore- 
told that the heaven shall pass away and the 
elements melt. 

On the other hand— to return to i Pet iii 8 — 
we find there that the deluge, or the water of it, 
is said to be the saving means, where we should 
have been disposed to say that the Ark was the 
saving and the water the destroying means. 'But 
Luke here notes the restitution or antitype (see ch. viii).' 
We may also notice in passing a very remarkable 
resemblance between i Peter and 2 Peter in the use 
of the preposition Aa, ' through.' For it is a slight 
alleviation of the difficulty, and only a slight one, 
if we give the same rather peculiar sense to the 


preposition in both passages — as it appears that we 
must give it — and translate it ' by the division of 
water.' The persons in the Ark in i Peter were 
brought safely through by the waters dividing so as 
to leave a special path for the Ark, whereby it was 
uninjured by the cataracts of heaven which opened 
and the fountains of the great deep which broke up. 
Those who attempt (if any still attempt) to main- 
tain the literal accuracy of the Genesis account of 
Noah's ark must admit that this ' deeply laden, sail- 
less, oarless, and rudderless craft, if by good fortune 
it escaped capsizing in whirpools, or having its 
bottom knocked into holes by drags (like those 
which prove fatal even to well-built steamers on the 
Mississippi in our day), would have speedily found 
itself a good way down the Persian Gulf, and not 
long after in the Indian Ocean, somewhere between 
Arabia and Hindostan. Even if eventually the Ark 
might have gone ashore, with other jetsam and 
flotsam, on the coasts of Arabia, or of Hindostan, 
or of the Maldives, or of Madagascar, its return to 
the " mountains of Ararat " would have been a 
miracle more stupendous than all the rest.'^ We 
must bear in mind that the difficulties of the sub- 
sidence of the waters in the floating of the Ark 
were fully as great as those of their increase and 
prevalence. 'The assertion that the surface of a 
body of deep water, to which no addition was made, 
^ Huxley, Lux Mundi and Science. 


and which there was nothing to stop from running 
into the sea, sank at the rate of only a few inches 
or even feet a day, simply outrages the most ordi- 
nary and familiar teachings of every man's daily 
experience.' i Peter partly meets this difficulty. 

Tke Spirits in Prison in i Peter — Enoch. 

If we pursue further the sense of i Peter, we find 
exactly similar phenomena : the passages are obscure 
until illuminated from the Book of Enoch. One 
has been already mentioned as discovered by Dr 
Hort^ in i Peter i. Here follow others. 

The spirits in prison who were disobedient are 1 Pet m 19. 
distinctly, and seem to be exclusively, the souls of 
those who were destroyed by the deluge. But first 
of all we find in Enoch the mention of a prison 
for the stars who were disobedient. ' The angel 
said : This is the place where heaven and earth En xviu 14. 
terminate; it serves for a prison for the stars of 
heaven and the host of heaven. And the stars which 
roll over the fire are they which have transgressed 
the commandment of God before their rising because 
they did not come forth at the appointed time. 
And He was wroth with them and bound them till 
the time when their guilt should be consummated 
in the year of the mystery.' 

^See p. 123. 


Secondly: we have the prison of the fallen angels: 
En xviii 14. And Uriel said to me : ' Here will stand the angels 
Gen vis. who have sinned with women' — a reference to the 
sin which caused the deluge — ' and with their 
women also it will fare in like manner as with 
their friends.' Elsewhere we read of the offspring 
En X 13. of this unholy union : ' In those days they will be 
led off to the abyss of fire : in torment and in 
prison will they be confined for ever and ever.' 
There is a prison of the angels also: 'This place' 
En Mi 10. (of chaos) ' is the prison of the angels, and here 
En i.iix 28. they will be imprisoned for ever.' Again : ' With 
chains shall they be bound, and in their assemblage- 
place of destruction shall they be imprisoned.' 
Thirdly : that human beings are in prison is clear 
En XX 6. from the following : ' Saraqael, one of the holy 
angels, who is set over the spirits of the children 
of men, whose spirits have sinned.' 

Fourthly : there is a later passage in which a 
En ixiii I. desire to repent is shewn by those in prison. ' In 
those days will the mighty and the kings who 
possess the earth implore His angels of punishment 
to whom they were delivered to grant them a little 
respite, that they might fall down before the Lord 
of Spirits, and worship, and confess their sins before 
Him. And they will . . . say : Blessed is the Lord 
of Spirits ! . . . We have now learnt that we 
should glorify and bless the Lord of Kings . . . 
for we have not believed before Him.' . . . Upon 


this regret for unbelief and desire to confess their 
sins and to worship before the Lord on the part 
of the spirits in prison is built by St Luke the 
idea that the Messiah after His death on the Cross 
receives a spiritual quickening in order to go and 
preach to them. 

T/te House of God in i Peter — Enoch. 

There is also another passage which clearly reflects i pet iv 17. 
an idea of the Book of Enoch, one to which we shall 
refer at greater length hereafter, i Peter says ' It jcn xd 13. 
is time for the sentence' (or judgment) 'to begin 
from the house of God.' Now, we find in Enoch that 
after the Eighth week of righteousness, 'they will 
acquire houses through their righteousness, and the 
House of the Great King will be built in glory for 
evermore. And after that in the Ninth week the 
righteous judgment will be revealed to the whole 1 Pet iv 13. 
world, and all the works of the godless will vanish 
from the whole earth, and the world will be written 
down for destruction, and all mankind will look to 
the path of righteousness. And after this will be 
the great eternal judgment, in which he will execute 
vengeance amongst the angels. And the first 
heaven,' etc. (See p. 280 below.) 

The source of the canonical passage is unmistake- 
ably Enoch. It is indeed claimed that Ez ix 6 is 


the source instead of Enoch. But this cannot be. 
Ezekiel says : ' Slay utterly old and young, both 
maids and little children, and women : but come 
not near any man upon whom is the mark ; and 
begin at my sanctuary.' (LXX ' my holy ones.') 
'Then they began at the ancient men which were 
before the house. And he said unto them. Defile 
the house, and fill the courts with the slain.' Now 
even making all allowance for the disregard of 
context by the Christian Prophets when they quote 
the O.T., we must hold that this forced connexion 
with Ez ix 6 is going rather too far in such utter 
disregard. The thought itself is worth much, but 
the connexion with Ezekiel is worth nothing, and 
is non-existent. There is to be a slaughter, says 
Ezekiel, through the midst of Jerusalem, of all 
that have not a special mark on their foreheads 
Apvii3,ix4. (and this expression, no doubt, is the origin of 

Ap xiii i6 f. 

Apxx4. several passages in the Apocalypse). But when 
the house itself is to be defiled with the slain, it 
is not possible to see how the house can be identi- 
fied with 'us,' 'the saints.' Ezekiel does not so 
identify them, but it is obvious that i Peter i 17 
does. On the contrary Ezekiel means : ' Begin 
by giving the order to the aged saints who stood 
at (LXX in) the sanctuary as its warders, and let 
them slay.' That is all intelligible, and it makes 
very little difference to the clear sense whether 
we follow the LXX or the Hebrew. i Peter 



nearly always follows the LXX in its quotations. 
Only by analogy can we find the words 'from the 
house ' in Ezekiel at all. In fact, though Westcott 
and Hort give it as a quotation from Ez ix 6, it 
is just as likely to come from any one of a score 
of other passages in O.T. Obviously the Ezekiel 
source must be given up and the Enochian origin 
must be admitted. 

The meaning is then clear. The ' time ' is come : 
' another week, the eighth, of righteousness,' says 
Enoch: Ezekiel here specifies no time. The ' House 
of the Great King is builded in glory for evermore,' 
says Enoch ; Ezekiel does not mention ' the House of 
God': but i Peter has enlarged upon this spiritual i pet ii 5 ff. 
building in a previous page, and it inspires some 
of the leading thoughts in the Epistle. The House 
is composed of the saints as spiritual and living 
stones, and so naturally they are identified in 
I Pet iv 17 with the House. But the judgment 
sentence does not begin with being a sentence upon 
the saints, who are not judged, for ' upon them 1 Pet iv 14. 
resteth the spirit of glory and the spirit of God,' as 
Luke has just observed, and they are to ' entrust their 
souls to their faithful Creator,' as he presently says. 
It begins with the building of us as the spiritual and 
living House of God wherein dwelleth righteousness.^ 2 Pet iii 13. 

^ We may pause at this point to refer to Dr Hort's learned note upon 'a i Pet ii g 
royal priesthood,' for such, he finally concludes, is the right translation. 
The present writer ventures to differ from this, and to translate in the 


The next following words, 'and if first at us,' 
which have always seemed to be a sort of a 
fortiori argument just because the quotation from Pro- 
verbs in the next verse is d, fortiori, are not so really. 
They do not mean as i8 does 'if we are scarcely 
saved, the ungodly will not be saved at all.' But 
they have a clear meaning when we refer to the 
passage in Enoch which says : ' To the week of 
righteousness a sword will be given that judgment 
En xci 12. and righteousness may be executed on those who 
commit oppression, and sinners will be delivered 
into the hands of the righteous.' In other words 

natural way thus, 'a King's house, a priesthood, a holy nation.' 
Hort admits that the original is Ex xix 5 f ^ao-fXeiOK iepdrevfi-a khI iBvoi 
S,yi.ov, and that the LXX meant the translation to be 'a kingdom, a 
priesthood, and a holy nation ' — three terms and not two ; that 2 Mace 
ii 1 7 clearly understood the words so, for it has put the definite article 
before each of the three terms ; and that Philo did the same though he 
more correctly translates ' palace.' Hort is further inclined to translate 
'a kingdom which is also a priesthood.' He should have said 'a 
palace, a priesthood.' For the word does not mean a kingdom, which 
is paaCKelav. But he adds : ' the apposition is too harsh and obscure.' 
Then, apparently misled by the Latin and Syriac versions and Clement 
and Origen, he falls into the A.V. translation. If he had happened to 
see how closely the Book of Enoch is followed in i Peter, he would not 
have troubled about these versions and fathers, nor about the apposition. 
The right translation is quite clear. ' You are a King's House, ' says 
Luke, ' a body of priests,' and thus he follows the same understanding 
of Ex xix which 2 Mace had followed before him. There is no need to 
imagine an adjective iSacriXeios which in N.T. and in all the rest of 
LXX is non-existent, for the |8o<riXiK6s, which Luke knows well (Ac xii 
20, 21), and James and John know also. The reference is plainly to the 
■' House of the great King which is now being built in glory for ever- 
more.' See further chap. viii. 


1 Peter says : If a man suffer as a Christian, a 
follower of Messiah, let him not be ashamed, for 
though persecuted now by his fellow-men, unjustly, 
and so saved with difficulty, he will share the 
approaching victory of Messiah, the great King, 
whose spiritual House is now being built in glory 
with us first, and let him glorify God in the name 
of Messiah to whose House he belongs, as a 
spiritual stone in it : because the time is at hand 
— the seven weeks are past and the eighth week ^ 

' When once the importance of the Book of Enoch is fairly recog- 
nised in the mind of the Christian Prophets, it will be seen that this 
passage of Enoch has a wider bearing than appears at first, namely 
in connection with the Pentecost of Acts ii. 

It is probable that these seven weeks were at first identified with 
those which elapsed between the Resurrection and the Descent of the 
Holy Ghost. 

The eighth week of righteousness would quickly be interpreted to 
mean not a week of days but of some longer unit, first of years and 
then of seven years, or ' of a time, times, and half a time,' according to 
the prophetic notation of Daniel vii 25, which would be combined 
with it. It would be an interesting study to ascertain what was the 
influence of the Book of Daniel on the Book of Enoch, and of the 
interpretation of one upon that of the other. It seems clear that John 
of Ephesus, e.g. in Ap. xi 2, 3, was guided by some method of pro- 
phetic chronology which was connected in some way with this eighth 
week of righteousness, which he dated from some supposed epoch of 
the life of Christ. Certainly 49 years from the beginning of John 
the Baptist's ministry would bring the great events of 69-70 very near. 
It seems also clear that Luke's chronology of Lk iii I, which pur- 
ports to relate to John's ministry, has some definite intention in 
relation to the fulfilment of prophetic time. The 49 years cannot be 
added to the date of the Resurrection in order to effect the total 70, 
but they may perhaps be counted from the beginning of John the 
Baptist's teaching, which was earlier than Lk iii. There is more 
arithmetic in the Christian Prophets than we have yet allowed for. 



is at its close now — and we of this generation are 
the House ; and if the judgment begins with the 
building of us, what shall be the end of those who 
reject the Gospel of God which we now preach ? 

Piovxisi. The next verse, which is cited direct from Proverbs, 
has undoubtedly misled us in our ignorance of 
Enoch, which has never been known to the average 
reader, and was never seen in English till 1821, 
when Archbishop Laurence translated it. The 
' scarcely ' of Proverbs is applied by i Peter in 
the obvious sense of the persecution or trial which 
now besets the ' Christian,' a term which no N.T. 

AcxLvi28. writer uses except Luke here and twice in the Acts. 
Before concluding this part of the subject, let us 
turn back to the passage in 2 Pet i to which I 
have referred elsewhere ^ as the Pauline passage, by 
which it is not meant that St Paul wrote it, but " 
that many have seen in it a resemblance to his 
style of thought. Now Dr Chase has been rather 
severe upon 2 Peter in saying that if we go further 
into the examination of his phraseology we do not 
fare better. He says^: 'The student's hope is 
disappointed ' if he ' patiently ponders on the words ' 
of 2 Peter. ' The sense of the artificiality of the 
expression does not wear off, and as he dwells on 
it, he cannot honestly say that its significance grows 
upon him.' 

^ The Christian Prophets, pp. 149 ff. 

2 Hastings' Diet, of the Bible, art. Peter, Second Epistle, p. 809 a. 


The House of God in 2 Peter. 

I venture to think that such language is fatal to 
the exponent at least in the case of a N.T. writer. 
It shews that he has not yet stood at the right point 
of view for watching the movements of that writer's 
brain. Every writer of O.T. and N.T. wrote sense ; 
sense which he understood himself, without having 
to seek it and search it out, as Dr Hort would 
maintain that the O.T. Prophets had to do ; sense 
which he meant his readers to understand. This 
obvious remark is exceedingly necessary, for the 
truth of it goes to the very root of our understanding 
of holy scripture, which has for so many centuries been 
treated as a mass of mystery, as a storehouse of 
revelation, as a reservoir of truth ' which passeth 
knowledge,' that we have well-nigh ceased to think 
that it yields to the patient application of an ordinary 
mind furnished with ordinary materials. Yet to 
this it does yield. The clearer it becomes that the 
author of 2 Peter was a Prophet himself, the clearer 
it also becomes that he did not seek out and search 
out his own meaning. When once we know that 
he had the Book of Enoch before him, we have no 
difficulty in understanding his use of the fine image 
of 'the House of the Great King which is builded 
in glory for evermore.' 

This is the image which inspires the passage in 
2 Peter i i-ii, and on which it is transparently con- 


structed. The writer and his readers are still in 
the eighth week in which the House is being builded. 
The materials have been all abundantly granted 
by the divine Power even as Hiram King of Tyre 
once granted materials for that House of God which 
Solomon built. The foundation has been laid in 

1 Cor iii II. the faith of Jesus Messiah, and 'other foundation 

2 Tim ii 20. 

can no man lay than that which is laid.' Of 
course St Paul is working on the same idea exactly 
in I Cor iii 1 1 ff. It was therefore one that had 
been grasped by him, probably in common with 
Silvanus, even some months before he wrote the 
Epistle to the Romans, in which his use of it will 
occupy our attention later in chapter vi. The Faith 
I Cor iii II. in Jesus Christ is what St Paul calls 'Jesus Christ,' 
and what 2 Peter calls 'your faith.' On this 
foundation, with the materials granted, which St 

1 Cor iii 21. Paul calls 'all things' — 'all things are yours' — and 

2 Pet i 3. 

which 2 Peter calls ' all things,' different builders ^ 

1 Cor iii 12. raise very different fabrics. But the readers of 
"^ "^ ' ^' 2 Peter are to ' supply ' seven successive stages or 

2 Pet i 5. layers of precious spiritual power, ' using (introducing 

I Cor iii 10. 

by the way) all diligence ' to ' build the structure 

^ In Enoch xciv 7, as in I Chr xxi.x 2, is to be found the beginning of 
St Paul's remark in this passage about ' gold, silver, precious stones.' . . 
Enoch says : ' Woe to those that build their houses with sin ; for they 
will be overthrown from their foundation and will fall by the sword ; 
and those who acquire gold and silver will perish in judgment utterly.' 
This follows upon the passage which is given below (p. 281), as 
reproduced in Eph v 14, but which has not, I think, been hitherto 


upon the foundation which the apostles, as wise 
master-builders, have laid.' They are to furnish 
every layer in or by its preceding base, so that it 
rests upon it. It may be asked, Why then do we 
not find here the preposition k-wl upon, if the metaphor 
is really one from building ? The answer is that 
this preposition is present there, in the compound 
eirixopriyria-aTe, and further, that the house being of a 
spiritual nature, the writer finds that ev in or by is 
more suitable than a repeated k-w'u since every power 
is to be supplied in or by its predecessor. These 
seven powers or spirits are Virtue, Knowledge, 
Temperance, Endurance, Godliness, Brotherly-kind- 
ness, Love. They are not called powers or spirits 
by the author : perhaps to call them so impairs 
the metaphor ; but he says they can ' exist ' and 2 Pet i s. 
' abound,' and can ' be present ' to the individual. 
In view of the observation about to be made below, 
that the Holy Spirit as such is not mentioned in 
the Epistle, there is nothing to prevent us from 
treating these as forms of the seven Spirits of 
God, in agreement with the idea of Ap i 4. 

However this may be, continuing, we find that 
the idea of a foundation-stone or chief corner-stone, 
which is also a possible stone of stumbling — the 
same idea which we have had so clearly set forth 
in I Peter ii 6-8 — underlies the following verses 
also. For the readers of 2 Peter are to be zealous 
builders who make their ' foundation solid,' so that \ pS ! i?! 


they may ' never stumble ' upon the stone of 
stumbling ; and by thus building fair on a firm 
basis they will find that for them is 'supplied the 
porch of access into the eternal kingdom of our 
Lord and Saviour Jesus Messiah.' With any im- 
perfect state of sight/ such as forgetfulness of the 
cleansing of sins once for all may superinduce, 
the individual soul may fatally stumble, and from 
this danger the presence of the Seven Spirits, as 
Apivs. lamps of burning fire, may protect him.^ 

It will hardly be denied, after a careful con- 
sideration of the Enochian parallel, (i) that 2 Peter 
has a clear intelligible image behind his words ; 
(2) that it is the same image which appears in 

1 Peter ; (3) that no forger or pseudonymous 
writer could have constructed this passage of 

2 Peter upon what he found in i Peter ; (4) 
that while the Book of Enoch provides the clue 
to its meaning throughout, there is nothing else 
which provides throughout a satisfactory interpre- 
tation at all. 

' Is not uvunrdi^uif added to the tv<j>\6s worth notice (2 P i 9) by 
those who believe in Luke's actual practice as a physician of the body, 
as a sample of medical diagnosis? 

2 See C. P. p. 184. 



Before proceeding to consider the historical situa- 
tion which appears to have produced the composition 
of I Peter by the agency of Silvanus, this is an 
opportunity to offer some remarks upon the Uterary 
features of the Fetrine Epistles, apart from their 
subject matter. The following are supplementary to 
those which the present writer has made elsewhere 
upon the style of 2 Peter,i and which have not so far 
been disputed or even noticed. Probably all observa- 
tions upon the literary style of short treatises of a 
few pages in length are regarded with extreme diffi- 
dence by many persons, and there may even be 
controversial writers who consider such critical 
remarks generally not worth the paper on which they 
are printed. This is not my view, and so far as I 
have been able to pursue the question of literary style 
in the Fetrine Epistles, I can only say that I have 
found that the evidence, besides being definite, points 

' The Christian Prophets, pp. 149 ff. 


all in one direction. No writer within my knowledge 
has hitherto put forward the theory of identity of 
authorship for the Acts, i Peter, and 2 Peter. Nor 
could I consider it fair to maintain it here unless both 
sides of the evidence from literary style were fairly 

The use of re. 

For instance, let me say that I was much impressed 
by a remark of Mr. Bebb's ^ : ' A very striking, because 
obviously unpremeditated, illustration of the classical 
character of St Luke's vocabulary will be found by 
examining in a concordance the distribution of the 
use of re, too, both, in the Books of the N.T.' True ; 
this is not too small a matter to overlook. Now the 
author of Acts has a remarkable fondness for the use 
of re: he uses it in Acts about 130 times. In the 
Gospel of Luke it is used about 8 times. In the 
other three Gospels together it occurs about 8 
times : in all St Paul's Epistles, some 25 times : 
in Hebrews some 20 times. In the Petrine 
Epistles it never occurs. To what does this 
evidence point } Does it shew that Luke is not by 
the author of Acts? or that Hebrews is by Luke.? 
Does it tend to shew that the Petrines are not by 
Luke.' Such inferences would be no juster than to 
say that the first xxi chapters of Matthew, which 

^Hastings' Diet. B., art. "Gospel of Luke," p. 169 b. 



have no re, are not composed by the writer of the last 
vii chapters, which contain 3 instances of it. For on 
further examination we note that the more history 
Luke wrote, the fonder he became of using re. 
In the first half of Luke it occurs once : 
In the second half 7 times: 

In the first half of Acts 54 times : 

In the second half 78 times. 

In St Stephen's speech, which is nearly as long as 
2 Peter, I can find but one re. But a speech ap- 
proaches more nearly to an epistle than does the 
account of a judicial trial or a shipwreck. My own 
explanation of the distribution of re is simply that the 
historian Luke was more ready to appreciate the 
utility of the particle -re than he had been when he 
undertook to write i Peter for Peter. If he could 
write the first 40 pages of his Gospel, as he has done, 
without using re more than once, it is not surprising 
that he should write 1 1 pages of Epistle without using 
it even once. There are numerous places in the first 
40 pages of Luke where the -re would have been 
grateful, and why he chose to say e.g. ' both to eat and 
to drink ' in the latter part of the Gospel and only to 
say 'to eat and drink' in the former is a small 
difficulty which finds its solution, as it appears to me, 
simply in the growing sense on St Luke's part of the 
value of this particle. His mind became more and 
more accustomed to see things in pairs and parallels, 
to match type with antitype, to look on this side and 



on that, to balance fact with fact, according as his 
prophetic study lent itself to the ideas of corre- 
spondence and conciliation. We shall see in chapters 
viii and ix the fuller tendencies of this parallelism in 
Acts, of which the use of re is symptomatic. 

References to ' the Holy Spirit! 

A more important question is opened up when we 
come to observe the single reference to the word 

2 Pet 1 21. ' Spirit ' in 2 Peter, where it is said that ' men spake 
direct from God, being carried by the Holy Spirit' 
In other words the Spirit is limited to prophecy. 
It might seem at first as if this very limited use of the 
term must argue an early period of the Church when 
the fulness of the gifts of the Holy Spirit was not 
understood, and when the account of the first Christian 
Pentecost was not current as we have it in Acts ii. It 
is quite true that the same limited use appears in the 

Apxxiii?. Apocalypse, where the Spirit is not found except as 
the Spirit of Prophecy, and where we have instead the 

Api4, etc. more archaic mention of the seven Spirits. But John 
of Ephesus was an extreme conservative in his 
language and imagery. The writer of 2 Peter, on 
the other hand, is in full accord with St Paul and 
with I Peter when he says in the very opening of his 
first chapter that ' the divine Power (of God and 
Jesus our Lord) hath granted us all things that tend 
unto life and godliness . . . ,' the ' things ' being the 


seven gifts already described (p. 148). Thus it seems 
that ' his divine Power ' (' divine ' occurs in Acts xvii 2 Pet. i 3. 
29 alone of N.T.) is here another term for His Holy 
Spirit, and if so, there is a close resemblance with the 
interchange of terms in the opening verses of Acts : 
'Ye shall be baptised with Holy Spirit' (we note the Ac is. 
same absence of the article here as in 2 Pet i 21). . 
'Ye shall receive power when the Holy Spirit cometh Ac is. 
upon you.' In fact ' power ' and ' Spirit ' are almost 
if not quite interchangeable terms. When i Peter 
says ' those who are kept by the power of God,' he i Pet i s- 
means ' by the Spirit of God.' When 2 Peter says 
■ we made known to you the power and presence of 
our Lord Jesus Christ,' he means 'the spirit and 
presence ' which are contrasted with the ' magnificence ' 
of Him, which we are able to report as "eye- 
witnesses ' ; for ' spirit and presence ' are essences of 
which only imperfect notions can be conveyed to the 
disciples by the Apostles, who ' make them known ' 
to the best of their power, and assuredly do not resort 
to myths for the purpose. Here, then, is a case 2 Pet i 16. 
where the relation of i Peter to 2 Peter is very clearly 
seen when once it is allowed that both Epistles may 
proceed from the author of Acts. 

I would fain linger upon this part of the subject 
if only considerations of space permitted. Consider- 
ing the brevity of i Peter and the extreme brevity 
of 2 Peter, and considering that epistles are not 
history, and that these two Epistles were written at 


least some years before Acts, and also in view of 
the fact that so learned an editor of St Luke as 
Dean Farrar has said that St Luke ' has two styles,' ^ 
it may perhaps suffice if I pass on to a review of 
the results obtained by a very capable writer on 
this subject. 

Dr. S Davidson on the styles of the Petrines. 

The phraseology of i and 2 Peter, apart from 
Acts and Luke, has received a very thorough and 
impartial treatment many years ago by Dr. Samuel 
Davidson.^ He concludes his observations thus : ' It 
is very difficult to attribute the two Epistles to the 
one author Peter. Were we called upon to decide 
positively either to admit 2 Peter as Peter's, or to 
reject it as supposititious, we should take the former 
alternative, believing it to be on the whole exposed 
to fewer objections. ... It breathes an apostolic 
spirit. . . . But our mind is not wholly satisfied 
respecting it.' But I must review the hst which he 
has given of the differences of language between 
I and 2 Peter (p. 430 fif.). 

{a) The appellations applied to God the Father 
and to Christ. These differences seem to me infini- 
tesimal and immaterial. ' God appears 40 times in 
I Peter ; in 2 Peter a very few times.' 

'^Book by Book, Int. to Acts. ^ Int. to N.T. vol. iii. 


{b) The second coming of Christ is called in 
2 Peter ' coming,' ' day of the Lord,' ' day of judge- 
ment ' ; in I Peter • revelation.' But we observe 
•judgement' (or sentence, /cpz/xa) is used very much 
in the same way in i Pet iv 17 as 'judging' (Kpiais) 
in 2 Pet ii 9. This difference is immaterial. On 
' revelation ' in i Peter some remarks will be found 
in chapter vi. 

(c) The use of ' as ' (ojj). A peculiar and rather 
otiose use of it does not occur in 2 Peter so often 
as it does in i Peter, but it does occur in 2 Pet i 3. 
It means something less than quippe, utpote in Latin. 
The same use is found in Acts i 4 /3 (Blass) Kai eoy 
awaXitpfi.evo'i, xvii 14 (Blass) toy eTr/ Ty\v OaXaa-a-av, 
xvii 22 0)9 SeicriSai/ULOvea-Tepovi, xxiii 15 a)? /meXXovrai, 
ib. 20. 

(<f) The use in 2 Peter of a subordinate clause 
such as ' the corruption that is in the world in lust ' 
i 4 ' has no parallel in i Peter.' Dr. Davidson has 
overlooked the expression in i Pet iii 2,' Your chaste 
behaviour in fear.' 

{e) ' Attributes of Christianity ' in i Peter, ' hope,' 
'grace,' 'truth,' etc. differ from those in 2 Peter, 'way 
of truth/ ' way of righteousness,' etc. This is very 
hypercritical. We only need to look at the analysis 
of 2 Pet i 5-6, which passage will suffice (p. 149). 

{/) 'The mode of introducing quotations from 
O.T.' As to inferences which can be based upon 
this when there are only three quotations from O.T. in 


2 Peter according to Westcott and Hort (1881), I have 
shewn above (p. 116) a remarkable correspondence. 

{g) ' In 2 Peter more stress is laid on the " further 
knowledge " of God ; in i Peter more on hope.' Very 
likely. We cannot have monotony, and do not desire 

(A) ' 2 Peter is marked by a poverty of language, 
drawling repetitions.' The same might be said of 
many passages in St Paul, e.g: the well-known 
passage in 2 Cor i 3-8, where TrapaKoXeiv and its 
derivatives occur 10 times in 12 lines. We need 
not call this ' drawling.' There is in fact an unusual 
command of language in 2 Peter. The repetitions 
in 2 Peter are quoted by Davidson (p. 434). 

(?) ' The style of i Peter is fresh, lively, periodic : 
of 2 Peter flat, cold, heavy.' These epithets are far 
too random. It is true that there is much more of 
the pithy, gnomic, practical teaching in i Peter, and 
this accounts for much of the difference in the form 
of the sentences. The occasions of the two letters 
were different, and the people addressed were in 
I Peter Asiatics and in 2 Peter the Romans.^ But 
as if to show that the writer was in Rome, he refers 
1 Pet V 8. distinctly to the ' roaring lion walking round ' the 
amphitheatre, which was probably in or near the 
Campus Martius, the Colosseum not being yet built. 
No one will suppose that St Peter had been a lion- 
hunter in the jungles of Babylonia. Nor shall we 

'See The Christian Prophets, p. l6l. 


admit that he merely drew on his imagination for 
a description of the enemy of man as the king of 
beasts in all his uncaged grandeur. The Roman 
lion represented hatred of the Gospel — Christianas 
ad leones. 

But there are more terms common to the two 
Epistles than we might suppose. Davidson quotes 
for similar conformation of periods i Pet ii 7, 8, 1 2 ; 
iii 7, 19; 2 Pet i 3. S ; " 4-ii- 

The article separated from its substantive by 
several inserted words: i Pet ii 2, iii 3, 16 ; 2 Pet 
i 4, ii 7, iii 2. 

The salutation is common to both. avaaT po<^y\} etc. 
I Pet i 15, 17, 18; ii 12 ; iii i, 2, 16; 2 Pet ii 7, 18; 
iii II. a-woQtai^? i Pet iii 21, 2 Pet i 14 a/oerj? of 
God, I Pet ii 9, 2 Pet i 5. Nowhere else. ao-TrtXo? Km 
aixwfio^ combined i Pet i 19, 2 Pet ii 13, iii 14. 
Nowhere else. eiroirTt]^, eTroTrreveiv,^ 2 Pet i 1 6, i Pet 
ii 12, iii 2. 'iSios, I Pet iii i, 5, 2 Pet i 20, ii 16, 22, 
iii 16. Ko/j.l^ea-6ai of rewarding, i Pet i 9, v 4 ; 2 Pet 
ii 13. iropevecrQai iv eiridvfiiai^, kutu €Trt6v/j.las, I Pet 
iv 3, 2 Pet ii 10, iii 3. koXscv of God calling men, 
I Pet i 15, ii 9, 21, iii 9, v 10; 2 Pet i 3. 

'The verb and substantive occur twice in Eph. The active verb 
twice in Acts; once in quoting Am ix 11, it is forced in by Luke 
though not in LXX. He must therefore have been fond of the word, 
and we may compare his treatment of iin(rTpi\(/as : cf. TAe Christian 
Prophets, p. 161. 

"Verb twice in Eph in the same figurative sense. 

^See The Christian Prophets, p. 161. 


Among further coincidences of style between 2 
Peter and Luke may be added : — 2 Pet ii 1 5 fjucrOov 
aSiKiai of Balaam's with Acts i 18, €k /ulictOov r^y 
aSiKias of Judas. The same Hebraism occurs in 
Luke xvi 8 (steward of unrighteousness). 

Blass points out in Acts xx 3 an instance of a 
construction in common with 2 Pet i 20 and no- 
where else found In N.T. yivea-dai yvdofi}]? 'to become 
(part) of decision ' = to be decided. It is classical 
and finds parallels in Thucydides and Plutarch. 
Every peculiarity of 2 Peter that meets us as we 
observe more closely tends to prove the same 
conclusion that 2 Peter is by Luke. 

Among coincidences of style between i Peter and 
Luke may be mentioned i Pet ii 21 (Blass Acts, p. 
1 10 misprinted) {jTroXi/jLiravixiv 'forma ex lingua 
elegantiore arrepta,' compared with SieXl/niravev of /3 
recension of Acts viii 24 D. Neither word occurs 
elsewhere in the Bible but ^laX. in Tobit x 5. 

I Pet ii 6 Trepux^L of a passage in writing or its 
contents, cf Acts xxiii 25 and viii 32 -rrepioxij- Only 
here in the Bible, but 2 Mace ix 18, xi 16, 22. 

1 Peter claims to be by Luke as 2 Peter shews 
itself to be. 

: Pet V 12. Thus the hand of Silvanus, of which St Peter so 
candidly avows in his conclusion that he has availed 


himself, is abundantly attested in the style, structure 
and contents of i Peter. The only view which takes 
account of all the phenomena is that Luke is Silas, 
just as Silas is Silvanus. So modest is he that 
he will not mention his own name in his own 
works ; so helpful that he is ready to compose an 
epistle or two for his senior, the Apostle Peter, as 
he had been to write at the dictation of his other 
senior, his beloved yoke-fellow, the Apostle Paul. 

Nor was this service one of gratitude or affection 
only. Luke was moved by larger considerations 
of Church polity and by deeper requirements of 
Christian grace. The division of spheres of work 
and responsibility, which St Paul describes as a 
matter of history, had taken place some years Gai u ^ ir. 
before, and it had produced its results. One of 
these results inevitably was a danger of division 
of another kind, between those who said ' I am 
of Paul ' and those who said ' I am of Cephas.' 
St Paul had not known Christ after the flesh as 
one of the Twelve, though he seems to have seen 2 Cor v 16, 
Him: St Peter had 'gone in and out with Him.' 
St Paul embraced the future ; St Peter clung to 
the past. St Paul was philosophical and broad ; St 
Peter was narrow, but stood to his history. St Paul 
was sanguine and unshakeable and indomitable ; St 
Peter was timid, moody, and unequal to a crisis. 
His firmness had not been that of a rock, whatever 
his faith might have been, even in his Lord's 


lifetime on earth. And afterwards he had shewn 
at Antioch a like vacillation to that which beset 
him in the High Priest's hall. 

Si Peter and St Paul meeting in Rome. 

Our Lord had attempted long ago to confirm 
his moody character by that appeal to all the firm- 
ness he possessed when he called him Peter. And 
now in the decline of his age might not another 
attempt be made to encourage his timidity by an 
appeal to all the hopefulness that was in him ? 
He, too, was ' such an one as Paul the aged,' older 
in years, probably, than Paul himself, and after his 
labours among ' them of the circumcision ' in 
Palestine he had made his way to Rome. We do 
not know what had been the last occasion of their 
meeting. But we cannot but suppose that his 
movements had been very different to those of 
Paul ! How much more chequered was Paul's 
career by shipwrecks, jmprisonments, plots, perils, 
accusations, stripes ! Not a hint can we glean from 
Peter's Epistles or any other source of any trial that 
had befallen him in all those years. He might 
have lived quietly with Simon the tanner at Joppa, 
or continued in the scenes of his youth by the 
lake of Galilee still. At last, however, he was in 
the same great metropolis with his brother Apostle. 


A reconciliation might not be needed, but an 
understanding must have been. The writer of 
'Romans' and 'Galatians' had spoken and written 
somewhat freely of the Jewish law and of Peter Gai li u-h- 
himself The latter must have been more than 
human if he could endure unmoved the unnecessary 
description of his conduct at Antioch, set forth by 
the pen of one who was not ' in Christ before him.' 
To have read in a public letter to Christians of 
Jewish origin that he had 'stood condemned,' that 
he 'feared them of the circumcision,' that he had 
'dissembled/ that he 'walked not uprightly accord- 
ing to the truth of the Gospel,' that he 'lived as 
do the Gentiles ' ; and to know that this letter 
would perpetuate the memory of his error till the 
Judgment-day, and to feel that these statements 
must add to the violence of party-feeling, all this 
was enough to try the temper of a greater saint 
than Peter. As the former leader of the disciples, 
he would feel that he had perhaps shewn a 
grievous want of consistency, and deserved the 
censure which he had received, but he had not 
deserved to be stamped for life, if not till the 
Judgment-day, as a dissembler and a coward. If 
one member suffered by the public castigation of 
another, then all the members suffered with him, 
and Christ was divided, and the Body was torn. 
Even if private resentment could be smothered, 
the care for the commonwealth of the Church 


demanded an understanding. Thus in the nature 
of things, a clear and straightforward interchange 
of thought would follow the meeting of Peter and 
Paul at Rome. Nothing less would satisfy the fiery 
candour of the Apostle of the Gentiles, and per- 
haps nothing more would be needed by the senior 
and more conservative leader of the Twelve, whose 
heart was still so warm and true. 

St Luke as Mediator of St Peter and St Paul. 

Now the medium of this understanding would 
naturally be Luke. To St Paul he had ministered 
for years, and with him had shared his trials and 
dangers as a 'true yoke-fellow,' proximus huic longo 
sed proximus intervallo. Tuke could speak his 
mind to Paul. But he could also feel the strongest 
sympathy with Peter. He had not been at St 
Paul's side when he penned that painful Epistle to 
the Galatians. Had he been there, perhaps it would 
not have been written quite in those terms about 
Cephas. As a convinced Jew himself, though not 
' of the circumcision ' in the narrower sense, he 
would still 'look unto the rock whence he was 
hewn and to the hole of the pit whence he was 
digged,' without having committed himself to the 
writing of those strong yet necessary indictments 
of the Jewish law and its shortcomings which we 


can read in ' Romans ' and ' Galatians.' To say 
that St Paul was the Luther of the times and 
St Luke the Erasmus would of course be a mis- 
leading analogy. But there was in Luke an 
unwillingness in 60-70 A.D. to cast off the old 
moorings which attached him to the ancient Jewish 
Church of God, and this unwillingness survived all 
the straining of the cable with which St Paul, as 
some thought, had been pressing the eager pace. 
The vessel of the Church was not to cast those 
moorings till they were cut for her by the moral 
earthquake of the destruction of Jerusalem in 
A.D. 70. 

That St Luke had a mediating mind is to be 
inferred from his obvious modesty. To have written 
both ' Luke ' and ' Acts ' without once mentioning 
himself as the author is proof enough of his freedom 
from self-assertion, which is all the more confirmed if 
it is agreed that he was Silas, and the ' true yoke- 
fellow.' But while he was a good foil to St Paul's 
fiery energy, he was as well able to appreciate the 
slow and painful progress of the mind of St Peter 
along the lines of the O.T. We have seen how in 
company with St Paul he had been forbidden by the 
spirit of Joshua as type of Jesus to remain in Asia, 
and driven by the vision like that in 'Joshua' to 
cross the Jordan of the north-east Aegaean. His 
movements as well as his words had been guided by 
a sense of prophetic fulfilment. 


The lines of St Peter's teaching. 

Now, apart from i and 2 Peter, the lines of St 
Peter's teaching are not to be discovered anywhere 
but in St Luke's account of them in Acts. This 
has not been constructed out of the Petrine Epistles 
alone ; yet it is composed by a writer so deeply 
versed in prophetic lines of thought that he knows 
exactly what prophecies to select as the basis of 
his chief speaker's reasoned appeals to the people. 
Either then we have in Acts i-v the true account 
of what occurred, or we have the account which the 
author believed to be true, or we have both. How 
is it that the author has caught the prophetic spirit 
of the Petrines to such a remarkable degree pre- 
cisely on those points in them which have been for 
centuries so imperfectly understood .' Probably be- 
cause he derived his account not from John Mark, 
nor from Philip, nor from any hearer, but from 
the lips of Peter himself, whom he understood as 
a Christian Prophet. And when we look into it 
we find, to be sure, that same teaching of the 

Acts iv II. 'stone that was set at nought of you the builders, 
which was made the head of the corner,' only less 
elaborate than we find it in i Peter. There we 
find the same insistence on the prophetic word as 
we have seen in i and 2 Peter : not only on the word 

Actsiii22ff of Moses, the first Prophet, the original 'servant of 


the Lord,' concerning Joshua, 'A prophet shall the 
Lord your God raise up unto you from among your 
brethren, like unto me,' with the awful sanction 
following like those of 2 Peter, ' And it shall be that 
every soul, which shall not hearken to that prophet, 
shall be utterly destroyed from among the people': 
not only the word of Samuel, but ' yea and all the 
prophets from Samuel and them that followed after, 
as many as have spoken, they also told of these days. 
Ye are the sons of the prophets.' What is this last 
phrase but a parallel with i Peter i 14, ' children 
of obedience ' .^ As if he had said to the people in 
Solomon's porch, Ye are bound by all your traditions 
and your birth as Jews to listen to the prophets. 
There is not a speech of Peter of any length at all 
which does not turn upon a prophecy of the O.T. 
When first he opens his lips, it is to say, ' It was Acts ; 16. 
needful that the scripture should be fulfilled, which 
the Holy Ghost spake before by the mouth of David 
concerning Judas,' and he quotes two verses from the 
Psalms. When first he addresses the people in 
Jerusalem, it is to quote the wonderfully apposite 
passage of the Prophet Joel. Jesus, he adds, was Acts ii 17 ff. 
delivered up by the determinate counsel and fore- 
knowledge of God, as expressed by the O.T. Prophets, 
and Uavid, whom he quotes at length, was also 'aActsUasff. 
prophet,' and ' foresaw the resurrection of the Christ.' 
Peter sees in Psalm xvi the reference to the descent 
into Hades, which he has enforced in his first Epistle, 


a reference which we should not have acknowledged 
so readily in the present day. And he crowns 
Acts 1134. his quotation by another prophecy of the Ascension 
of the Christ by David. When the Apostles were 
released and returned to their own company, their 
song of thanksgiving is epitomised, but not so as 
to exclude the Messianic prophecy of Psalm ii by 
" David thy^ servant." When Peter addressed Simon 
Magus at Samaria he follows the lines of the pro- 
phetic ideal of Isaiah concerning ' the fast that God 
has chosen,' at least so far as regards the duty of 
' relaxing every bond ^ of iniquity.' On arriving at 
Cornelius' house at Caesarea, he is saluted by the 
centurion as a Prophet and receives his prostration 
with the regular salutation, ' Stand up : I myself also 
am a man.' This is the prostration of the Prophet 
of the Apocalypse to the Angel, who claims to be 
a fellow-servant of the Prophets, that is a fellow- 
prophet ; and it is also the same as that act of 
homage which St Paul in his Rules concerning the 
Prophets in Session declares that they may expect 
to receive from the unbeliever in church. 

^For the use of 'servant' as a prophetic term see The C.P. 
p. 104. 

^ For the ' fulfilment ' of this duty in the life of Christ according to 
the Christian Prophets, see the passage of Ignatius, Eph xix, in The 
Christian Prophets, p. 8, where I have ventured to supply a clear inter- 
pretation, if perhaps a new one. 

'AS / ACCOUNT HIM-- 169 

The faitliful brother as Peter accounts him. 

Thus St Luke was as much a brother and a 
fellow-servant and a fellow-prophet with St Peter 
as with St Paul. And however much he had adopted 
a forward interpretation of O.T. prophecy with his 
yoke-fellow, he was not out of touch with the more 
conservative understanding of the older primus inter 
pares of the Twelve. And he was welcomed by Peter 
as such. The attestation of Luke by Peter at the 
close of I Peter has possibly never yet been ex- 
plained. He says, ' By the hand of Silvanus, the 
faithful brother, as I account him, I write unto you 
briefly.' What is the meaning of ' the faithful brother 
as I account him ' .' There is little meaning in ' forti- 
fying him in his mission to the churches addressed 
by the Apostle's recommendation,' as Alford says. 
Silvanus was very well known in most of the 
churches addressed; that is to say, he was known Acxvie. 
in Asia and Galatia, and without doubt there were xx 15. 
those in Pontus, Cappadocia, and Bithynia whoxvi7. 
knew him well by name if not by sight. Priscilla xviii 2. 
and Aquila belonged to Pontus, and the perpetual 
travelling of the Jews would carry his hearers far 
afield. So if Peter had wished to recommend Silas 
more strongly he would have omitted the words ' as 
I account him ' altogether. ' The faithful brother ' is 
far more emphatic without them. The only account 



we can give of the added words is that Peter might 
be thought by some not to have so accounted him, 
and this is obvious from what had happened. Silas 
had been for more than lO years the constant com- 
panion of St Paul, and might be thought therefore 
to be identified with all that he had said and 
done in opposing Peter. But now the understand- 
ing had taken place, and Peter states that he fully 
recognises him, not merely ' supposes ' as A,V. 
says, but ' accounts ' him (R.V.) ' the faithful 
brother,' the faithful fellow-prophet who has brought 
about the understanding with Paul. He naturally 
calls him by the old and well-known name 

Luke's prop^al of redress to write i Peter. 

It is not too much to say that something like this 
had occurred. Luke suggested that the injury in 
disparaging, really or apparently, the authority of 
Peter, was done and could not be undone. It might, 
however, be compensated to some extent, and that 
by means of another letter. But the letter must be 
written in Greek, as the injurious letter had been. 
Peter would then express his doubts as to his own 
ability to write a Greek Epistle. The former fisher- 
man of Galilee was not likely to be a good Greek 
scholar. Luke then would volunteer to do the writing. 


The offer was accepted. The plan of the Epistle 
was almost self-constructed. Peter would naturally 
address the readers of the ' Galatians ' as neighbour- 
ing churches, for they had read St. Paul's Epistle. 
He would address them as ' elect sojourners of the 
dispersion,' that is, the members of the old Jewish 
Church scattered abroad, who were not less members 
because they were Christians. 

He would exhort them by their past history, by 
their present circumstances, and by their glorious 
hope to exemplify that ancient and primary lesson 
of endurance on which the prophets so invariably 
dwelt. He would claim their obedience to Christ as 
the Redeemer and Captain of their Salvation, as 
the Prince of Life, and chief corner-stone of the 
spiritual House, on which last theme he would ex- 
pound his leading prophetic text from Psalm cxviii. 
•Above all he would urge perseverance in well-doing, 
even if it were accompanied by suffering. This he 
has done so clearly and repeatedly in three separate i Pet u 15. 
chapters, as to suggest the idea that his own ex-iiii4ff. 
perience prompted the exhortation. Had he notivi4. 
himself suffered at the hand of St Paul as writer 
of the 'Galatians'.? Not that he was not in the 
wrong, but that he had suffered rather more than 
that wrong-doing required in justice. He was not 
an evil-doer ; he was not a meddler in other men's i Pet ;v 15. 
matters. And it should be not difficult to observe 
a difference between the condemnation of a man 


who did a wrong.i and the condemnation of a habi- 
tual wrong-doer. Thus Peter had endured for con- 
science sake, albeit his conscience had not acquitted 
him in the particular case at Antioch. 

Lastly, there is the insistence on the nearness of 
the Second Advent of Christ, described under the 
images employed in the Book of Enoch, and there 
are reminders that the author had been a witness 

I Pet V I. of the sufferings of Christ, that he was an Elder — 
which, as is shewn elsewhere,^ means a Prophet — 
and that he was charged with a special care of 

iPetv2ff. the flock of God, a care, however, which he would 

ii 24, 25. 

have his fellow-elders to feel with him. There is 
no sign of particular acquaintance with the details 
of church life of his readers, although he is aware 
that they are liable to such petty persecutions as a 
I Pet ii 20. box on the ear, railings, abuse, false accusations, 

iii 15. 

and such scornful demands as the question, ' Why 
do you believe ' .'' 

Lukes further proposal of redress — 2 Peter. 

Nor would Luke's good offices end here. While 
he composed for St Peter the first Epistle to these 
distant Christians of the East, he composed at a 

^ The word evil-doer^ KCLKoirocds, -eoj, occurs five times in i Peter ; 
well-doer, ayado-n-oiSs, -la, -^u, occurs six times. aXKoTpweTrla-KOTros 
is unique. 

^ T/ie Christian Prophets, p. 175. 


later time 2 Peter for the benefit of the Romans. 
The purpose of his doing so was not the same as 
of writing i Peter, but it was ancillary to it, to the 
extent of shewing, by the reference to St Paul's 
Epistles in the concluding verses, that Peter recog- = Pet i" is- 
nised Paul as a beloved brother, just as he had 
recognised Silas as a faithful brother ; that Paul's 
Epistles contained things hard to understand in more 
senses than one — for instance, some part of Gal ii ; 
that it was possible for a reader without knowledge 
and without confirmation in the faith, to torture 
some passages in them to his own ruin. These 
observations would serve to restrain sweeping con- 
clusions as to Paul's disparagement of Peter, and to 
give pause to those who would otherwise pass by 
the senior Apostle as little more than niagni nominis 

Again, the intimation in 2 Peter of a larger forth- 
coming work of a historical ^ kind, — which, however, 
is never said to be intended to be written by Peter = Pet i 15. 
himself, and which is announced in terms so entirely 
consistent with Luke's authorship, that we may safely 
speak of it as Luke's Gospel, — is meant for the very 
practical purpose of recommending that gospel, when- 
ever it should see the light, to the favourable notice 
of the Jewish Christians at Rome. 

Lastly, the mental equipment of the writer, or the 
joint authors, of 2 Peter is exactly that of i Peter, 

' See above, p. 130. 


as we have already seen, in point of quotations, 
explicit or implicit, from the O.T., and from Apo- 
cryphal or pseudepigraphical works, such as the Book 
of Enoch, and also in point of a belief in Prophecy as 
a living gift in the Church. Though we have not a 
definite claim for the Church as being one and 
the same through all the ages, like that which we 
have noticed in Acts xiii i, and like that which we 
shall presently notice in Eph i i, we have an ex- 
2 Pet i 12. pression which comes very near to it, ' confirmed in the 
present truth! ' The present truth ' is almost exactly 
the same as ' the ever present truth.' The truth has 
changed its form only in this, that whereas faith in God 
had till recently fastened upon His representative 
Messiah as one to come, it had now since Hiscoming 
on earth fastened upon Him first as a historical 
Person, to whom the writer bore witness as having 
^Petii6. clearly with his own eyes seen His majesty, and as 
2 Pet i 9. qualified therefore to instruct the blind who can only 
see what is near at hand ; and next as still to come 
again in glory. He could not have used the words 
'the present faith,' if he considered that a revolution 
had been wrought in ' the faith,' first because he feels 
that the whole gist of its opponent's mockery lies 
in the taunt that there never has been a revolution 
2 Pet iii 4. in the world, where ' all things continue as they were 
at the first, ever since the patriarchs fell asleep ' : 
and secondly, because he baises the whole of his 
arguments, apart from the historical portion of 


chapter i, upon the teaching of scriptures which are 
ancient or supposed to be so. 

The influe?tce of Luke in Ephesians. 

We have observed that the writing of Gal ii by St 
Paul must have conveyed a disparagement in the 
minds of the readers to the personal authority of St 
Peter. Bishop Lightfoot glides very smoothly over 
this, ^ and it is not easy to iind in his pages any 
reference to St Peter's feelings as a man and a 
colleague and a senior Apostle to St Paul. However, 
the Bishop admits that ' the point of St Paul's rebuke 
is plainly this : that ... St Peter was untrue to his 
principles, was acting hypocritically and from fear. . . . 
He argues on the glaring inconsistency and unfairness 
that Cephas should claim this liberty himself though 
not born to it, and yet by hypocritical compliance 
with the Jews should practically force the ritual law 
on the Gentiles and deprive them of a freedom which 
was their natural right.' He goes on to say that ' St 
Paul must have made his influence felt on the frank 
and enthusiastic temperament of the elder Apostle. 
The weighty spiritual maxims thrown out during the 
dispute at Antioch, e.g. would sink deep into his 
heart : and taking into account the many occasions 

'■ Galatians, Comm. on ch. ii, and St Paul and the Three, pp. 354 ff. 
of 6th ed. 


when either by his writings or by personal intercourse 
St Paul's influence would be communicated, we can 
hardly doubt that the whole effect was great' We 
can hardly doubt it, indeed. But if his words at 
Antioch had been ' drawn swords ' they would also 
have sunk deep. And the pain of this Galatian littera 
scripta would be far less easily healed. And if the 
Senior Apostle was tmtrue to his principles once, there 
was no knowing whether he would not be untrue 

St Luke, then, besides redressing the disparage- 
ment and restoring it so far as literary composition 
could restore it, in view of the facts that St Paul had 
written numerous Epistles, far more than we possess, 
while St Peter had written none in Greek, — St Luke 
found it desirable to do still more. The points which 
had divided his two chiefs had been partly character- 
istic and caused by temperament, partly conventional 
Gaiiig. and connected with their distinct spheres of work, the 
Jews and the ' Gentiles' respectively, and partly also 
circumstantial, such as time, experience, and the 
understanding of God's purpose would diminish. We 
cannot suppose that ' the grace of God ' was less to 
each than it had been before to St Paul when he said 
' By the grace of God I am what I am.' But readers 
of the Galatians, and others who were aware of the 
former differences between the two Apostles, might 
easily exaggerate this difference in point of doctrine. 
They knew what St Paul's doctrine was like, for it 


was ' evidently set forth ' in many a page ; but they 
did not know till they read i Peter and 2 Peter what 
St Peter's was. On doctrine they would say they still 
disagreed ; either one or the other was to be preferred. 
And the schismatic error which St Paul had con- 
demned in writing to the Corinthians, some of whom 
said 'I am of Paul, I am of Cephas,' would appear to 
members of other churches to have some ground in 
reason. The same would be felt by any who had 
2 Peter as the only representative writing of St Peter. 

Shortcomings of I Peter from the Pauline point of view. 

With I Peter also before them they would, no 
doubt, feel differently. It draws far closer to the 
heart of St Paul. It glows with the blessed conscious- i pet i 19. 
ness of personal redemption from sin. It trims the i 16, ii 5. 
holy flame of sanctification of life. It dwells upon i i, 15. 
calling and election. It expresses the resurrection of i 21, ,. 
Christ from the dead as a spring of new life. It m 21, f. 
glories in His exaltation at God's right hand. It 
recognises the duty of a good citizen in obedience and u 13. 
subordination to all lawful authority under the great 
government of Rome in the deserved punishment of 
the rebellious. In this respect how different is its 
tone from that of the Apocalypse ! It is alive to the 
power of the conscience. It is full of the moral teach- a 19. 
ing which is rooted in the Gospel and its truth. In all m 21. 



these ways it savours of the spirit of St Paul. The 
parallels in St Paul's Epistles will readily occur to the 
reader. And yet some contrasts might be found by 
the scrupulous and be exaggerated into differences by 
the unfriendly. They might say that i Peter comes 
far short of the ' Christ that liveth in me,' which is so 
expressive of St Paul. It does not breathe that eager 
love of death as of life, ' To me to live is Christ, to 
die is gain.' It draws far more than Pauline Epistles 
were wont to do upon personal and local O.T. types 
of the age preceding Abraham, such as Noah and the 
angels of the Book of Enoch. Nor is this so surpris- 
ing, since it is addressed to Jews as 'sojourners of the 
dispersion ' ^ in various parts of Asia, whereas St Paul 
addressed his readers collectively, whatever their 
geographical positions, without any distinction of 
Jewish race. An Epistle which in its very first line 
employs a strong Jewish term, ' dispersion,' must of 
necessity imply a distinction and a superiority which 
is something more than a priority of time, such as St 
Paul implies in the Romans, when he says three times, 
Romi 16. ' To the Jew first and also to the Greek.' It is certain 

ii 9 f. 

that I Peter contains many plain references to the 

' It is possible to infer, with Zahn, for instance, that i Peter is 
addressed to Gentiles, but only upon one condition, namely, that the 
Gentile converts regard themselves as an annexation of the J ews of the 
Dispersion. No Gentile Christian would at once think of himself as 
' an elect member of the dispersion, ' which is only a Jewish term. Jn vii 
35 means nothing more than ' the Jews dispersed among the Greeks or 
Gentiles.' Seep. 186 below. 



previous and inherited idolatry of its readers, — ' your 
vain conversation {i.e. idolatrous manner of life) i Pet i 
handed down from your fathers,' ' to have wrought iv 3. 
the will of the heathen ... in abominable idolatries,' 
' called out of darkness.' It is therefore certainly ii 
addressed to Gentiles, but it must have been deroga- 
tory to the sense of independence which many Gentile 
Christians would entertain towards their Jewish 
brethren when it addresses the Gentile Christians 
under a Jewish title. 

Hort on Ephesians and i Peter. 

Now in order to exhibit the closeness of the 
Petrine teaching to the Pauline still further, and to 
reduce still more the criticism of their differences, 
St Paul undertook, at the instance of Luke, to write 
a Pauline Epistle which should lay stress upon this 
essential unity of teaching with the i Peter which 
Luke at the same time wrote for St Peter under St 
Peter's hand. This Epistle is the ' Ephesians.' And 
it addresses Gentiles under their proper and simple Eph iu 2 ff. 
title. Let me here quote some tantalising remarks 
by Hort :i ' A few words must suffice on the relation 
of .the Epistle to the Ephesians to the First Epistle 
of St Peter. Their affinity has been often noticed of 

' The Romans and Ephesians. Prolegomena. Lectures. 1895, 
p. 168. 


late years, and comes the more clearly to light the 
more attentively each is studied. Opinion is much 
divided as to relative priority. One ingenious critic, 
Seufert, who has traced out many not obvious 
coincidences, besides imagining others, comes to the 
conclusion that both Epistles were written by the 
same author, and that he lived in the second century. 
The truth is that in i Peter many thoughts are 
derived from ' Ephesians,' as others are from that to 
the Romans ; but St Peter makes them fully his own 
by the form into which he casts them, a form for the 
most part unlike what we find in any Epistle of St 
Paul's.' It is quite disappointing to find in this little 
volume, of 200 pages or less, no other reference to 
this question of the relation of i Peter and 
' Ephesians ' : and to observe in Hort's Commentary 
on Part of i Peter (1898, p. 5) the following note : 
' This intimate dependence of i Peter on Romans and 
Eph. is important not only for fixing its time but 
for purposes of interpretation. The true key to not a 
few difficult passages of St Peter is to be found in 
tracing back the thought to its origin in one or both 
of those two Epistles of St Paul. This importance 
of theirs, it cannot be too often repeated, is not 
accidental : they are precisely the two most compre- 
hensive and fundamental of all St Paul's EpistleSj 
and they are connected much more closely together 
in their drift than appears on the surface.' 'The 
connexion [between i Peter and Eph.], though very 


close, does not lie on the surface. It is shewn more 
by identities of thought and similarity in the structure 
of the two Epistles as wholes than by identities of 
phrase ' (Hort, p. 5). 

It appears to be assumed by Hort throughout his 
remarks that St Peter drew his thought, if not the 
structure of his Epistle also, from Pauline Epistles, 
especially these two : and that having done so, he 
worked up the thought much further, ' making it 
fully his own by the form into which he casts it,' 
which certainly is a form of good Greek. In fact, 
according to Hort, the fisherman of Galilee was able 
to improve both on the thought and diction of the 
Pauline Epistles. This is an unfortunate position to 
assume, for it is quite untenable. And it is not held 
by one of Hort's ablest and most learned pupils, Dr. 
Armitage Robinson, who says,i with more candour 
than persuasiveness, to those at least who wish to 
think that we are not between two forgeries, in the 
shape of the two Epistles of Peter : ' It is exceedingly 
probable that St Peter could not write or preach, 
even if he could speak at all, in any language but 
his mother tongue, the Aramaic of Galilee, a local 
dialect akin to Hebrew.' With this remark the 
present writer quite agrees, but he feels that it 
compels us to admit either that i or 2 Peter or 
both are forgeries, or that we must forthwith pursue 

' Lecture on the Study of the Gospels in Westminster Abbey, 
Dec. I, 1900, reported in the Guardian of Dec. 5- 


a searching enquiry into the possibilities of the case 
in order to escape the shameful and damaging ad- 
mission that the Christian Church from the second 
century has been the victim of a forgery, not merely 
in the outer circle of attributed authorship, but in 
the inner circle of the text. The Epistle to the 
Hebrews does not claim in itself to be written by 
St Paul : but the Second Epistle of Peter, no less 
than the First, claims in its first line to be the 
writing of St Peter. There is here no mere question 
of the authorship of a document which may be cast 
in the mould of one author or of another, whose style 
is meant to be imitated, but of a definite persona- 
tion of the Apostle. That the whole Church should 
have been misled from the first on such a material 
point as this, would be a reason for mistrusting the 
Church entirely, alike on matters of doctrine and of 
evidence. Let us be quite sure of our ground before 
we condemn the Church as a dupe in its own Canon 
of its own Testament, and sweep off as a detected 
fraud of the second century a book which we confess 
that the second century cannot explain. 



The present chapter has for its aim to shew in 
parallel form the correspondence between the two 
companion Epistles, Ephesians and i Peter. The 
existence of the correspondence has been stated as 
a bare fact by Zahn, but I have not seen the paral- 
lelism exhibited at length, and I have been greatly 
surprised to find how it works out. It may interest 
others like myself, and the results which appear to 
flow from it have a distinct importance of their own 
for all who desire to understand the genesis of one 
of the more immediately stirring and impressive 
writings of the N.T. 

The following four or five score of correspon- 
dences are often, but not always, verbal. My object 
has been to shew identity of thought rather than of 
expression ; for I am content to think that we have 
not to deal with one author for these two Epistles, 
but the two authors, St Paul and St Luke. If any 
one should maintain that Ephesians came from the 
same pen and brain as i Peter, though exerted in 

1 84 


the name and under the hand of St Paul, I think 
he would have a fairly good case, only less good 
than that which is here maintained, or rather main- 
tains itself with a strong spontaneous eloquence. St 
Paul, we know, wielded the pen of a ready writer, 
and before we allowed the idea of St Luke writing 
Ephesians for him, we should require to have some 
reasonable ground against the probability that St 
Paul in this case wielded his pen himself, — such a 
ground as we have against the former fisherman of 
Galilee being able to write good Greek. The differ- 
ence of style which exists between Ephesians and 
Romans is a question which has been recently 
treated by very able hands.^ 

I Peter. 
i 3 Blessed be the God and 
Father of our Lord 
Jesus Christ, who . . . 
iii 9 That ye may inherit a 
I To the elect. 

20 Before the foundation of 
the world, 
i i6 Be ye holy, for I am 

i 19 a lamb unblemished, 
iii 4 Which is in God's sight 
(iviiiriov) precious. 
i 3 Begat us again unto an 

E^k i. 

3 Blessed be the God and 

Father of our Lord 
Jesus Christ, who . . . 
Blessed us in all spiritual 

4 He elected us for himself 

in him. 
Before the foundation of 
the world. 

That we should be holy 
and unblemished. 

Before him {KwrevCnnov). 

5 Foreordained us unto adop- 

tion as sons. 

II In whom we were made a 

14 The pledge of our inheri- 

^Sanday and Headlam, Coiiim. on Romans, 1895, Int. p. Iv ff. 



I Peter. 
i 3 According to his great 

i 7 Unto praise and glory 

and . . . 
i lo Grace which (corrjeth) 

unto you. 
i 1 8 Ye were redeemed . 

by the blood of . . . 

ii 24 He himself bare our sins. 

iv 10 Stewards of the manifold 

grace of God. 
i 20 Christ was manifested for 

i 20 At the end of the times 


i II What time {Kaipbv) the 
spirit of Christ was 

i 10 The (Christian) prophets 
who prophesied search- 
ing .. . 

i 12 Announced to you through 
them who preached the 
gospel to you. 

i 9 Receiving the end of be- 
lief, the salvation of 
ii 9 A people for (God's) own 

With its second paragraph, i 15 f., Ephesians 

begins to follow the course of Colossians chapter i. 

St Paul has 'heard of his readers' faith.' He 

' gives thanks and prays for them continually.' But 

Ephesians soon reverts to several thoughts of 

I Peter. 

1 Peter. 
i 13 The grace that is being 
borne unto you by reve- 
lation of Jesus Christ. 

Eph i. 

5 According to the good 

pleasure of his will. 

6 Untothepraiseofthegloryof 

(compare i 12, 14). 

6 Grace which he freely be- 

stowed on us. 

7 In whom we have the re- 

demption through his 

7 The remission of our trans- 


8 According to the riches of 

his grace. 

9 Made known to us the 

mystery of his will. 
10 The fulfilment of the times 

12 We (Christian Prophets) 

who have hoped before 
on the Messiah. 

13 By whom ye also heard the 

word of truth, the Gos- 
pel of your salvation. 

In whom by believing ye 
were sealed by the Holy 
Spirit of promise. 

Redemption of (God's) own 



Eph i. 
17 The spirit of wisdom and 

1 86 


I Peter. 
i 7 By revelation of Jesus 

i 4 An inheritance . . un- 
i 5 For you who are guarded 

by God's power, 
i 21 Who raised him from the 

iii 22 Who is at God's right 
hand, having gone into 
iii 22 Angels and authorities 
and powers 
Being subject unto him. 

I Peter. 

i 14 Cf children of obedience. 

iv 3 Having journeyed (far) in 

iv 3 Performed the will of the 

iv 4 They think it strange 
that you do not run 
with them, 
i 3 Begat us again unto a 
living hope. 

i 21 You who by his means 
are faithful unto God. 

Eph ii II ff. 

Eph i. 

1 8 His inheritance among the 


19 The exceeding greatness of 

his power towards us. 

20 By raising him from the 


20 And set him at his right 

hand in the heavenly 

2 1 Above all rule and authority 

and power. 

22 Subject under his feet. 

Eph ii. 
2 Sons of disobedience. 

2 In which sins ye had 


3 Doing the things chosen 

by the flesh. . . . 
3 As were also the rest. 

1, 5 You that were dead in 
transgressions hath he 
8 By the grace have ye been 
saved by means of faith ; 
this is Gods gift. 

With its third paragraph ii 1 1 ff., Ephesians 
addresses the Gentile Christians — most of whom were 
Jewish proselytes before they accepted Christ Jesus — 
in such a way as to remind them that there was much 
truth in the view of St Peter that they were once 
strangers and sojourners, that they were once afar 
off and now were brought near in the blood of the 
Jewish IVEessiah. On this theme, St Paul enlarges at 
some length. It is not fanciful to discern in this 



passage a deeper undertone of triumph in the recon- 
ciliation of Jew and Gentile which has received 
accentuation in the fuller understanding now estab- 
lished between the Apostle of the Gentiles and the 
Apostle of the Circumcision. The Gentiles had been 
' called the uncircumcision,' ' alienated from the com- 
monwealth of Israel,' 'strangers from the covenants 
and the promise,' 'having no hope,' ' without God in 
the world.' Now, Christ Jesus Himself is our peace;, 
in Him the two are created one new man. This 
sublime and stirring passage concludes with a very 
marked reference to i Peter in its imagery of the 
House of God. 

I Peter. 
ii II I beseech you as so- 
i 17 Pass the time of your 

i 16 ' Ye shall be saints.' 

iv 17 To begin from the house 
of God, and if from 
us. . . . 
i 12 Which were now an- 
nounced to you by 
means of those who 
preached the gospel to 
you, etc. 

ii 6 ' I lay in Zion a chief 

ii 2 That in him ye may be 
made to grow. 

ii 5 A spiritual house. 

ii 5 Yourselves -also . . are 
being built up ... to 
offer spiritual sacrifices. 

Eph ii. 
1 9 Ye are no more . . .so- 
journers. (For the con- 
trast see on iv 13 below.) 

19 Ye are fellow-citizens with 

the saints, and of the 
household of God. 

20 Being built upon thefounda- 

tion of the apostles and 

Messiah Jesus himself being 
the chief corner-stone. 

21 In whom the whole build- 

ing . . . groweth unto- 
a holy sanctuary. 

22 In whom ye also are being 

built up together for an 
habitation of God in 
the spirit. 


The Treatment of Old Testament Passages by the 
Christian Prophets. 

The last reference demands our close attention, 
although the point on which it turns is connected not 
so much with Ephesians as with Romans. Zahn 
has remarked^ that "the passages i Pet ii 4-8 and 
Rom ix 32 f. are not independent of each other, as 
appears from the facts (i) that both apostles in 
quoting Is xxviii 16 agree essentially in a strong 
divergence from the LXX version of the text, and also 
Rom ix 33. in the addition of the words ' upon him,' which are 

Rom X II. 

iPetiie. certainly spurious in LXX; and (2) that in i Pet ii 7 
the words ' stone of stumbling and rock of offence,' 
which originate in Is viii 14 (where the LXX diverges), 
and which St Paul has inserted into this quotation 
from Is xxviii 16, are tacked on to a quotation from 
Ps cxviii 22 immediately after the citation of Is 
xxviii 16. Here again (continues Zahn) Peter is not 
copying Romans. He knows the prophetic text 
from his own reading of it, for he gives in i Pet ii 6 
the attributes of the stone omitted by St Paul, which 
he has previously quoted in ii 4. But his mind 
retains the conception which St Paul had given to 
the prophetic word, and he spins out the threads pre- 
sented to him by St Paul in the combination of 
Is xxviii 16 and Is viii 14, while he joins on to them 
that of Ps cxviii 22." 

^ Einl. ii p. 38. 


The treatment of these passages in ' Romans ' and 
I Peter throws considerable light upon the practice of 
the Christian Prophets, when once it is understood 
that Romans is written by St Paul and i Peter by 
Silas- Luke. Here are the passages according to the 
LXX : we are not concerned with the meaning in- 
tended by the Septuagint translators, but only with 
their language : — 

Is viii 1 1 ff. Thus said the Lord : With the strong 
hand they disobey the walking of the way of this 
people, saying Let them not say a hard thing : for 
whatsoever this people say is hard : and fear ye not 
its fear nor be dismayed : Sanctify ye the Lord him- 
self and he shall be thy fear. And if thou have 
trusted upon him, he shall be to thee a sanctified 
thing, and ye^ shall not meet with stumbling as on 
(of) a stone nor with a fall as on (of) a rock. 

Is xxviii 16. Wherefore thus said the Lord 
Jehovah, Behold ^ I lay for the foundations of Sion 
a precious stone, an elect cornerstone, honourable, 
for her foundations, and he that believeth shall not be 
put to shame. 

Ps cxviii 22 ff. The^ stone which the builders 

^ Kai ovx W5 \C0ov irpoffKbix^rt, avvavrricTCGd^, oid^ ws ir^rpas Trrci/xari. 

^ 'I5oi> iyib i/i^XKa els rot Se/uAia SeiMX XWov TroXirreXij iK\eKTbv 

dKpoydivLouov ivTiiiov, els TO. BefxiXia avTTJs, Kal 6 inartiav oi ^7) 

^ MBov 6v dTrcSoKL/xaaav ol olKoSofioOi'Tes, oBros iyev^Bri els Ke(f>a\T}i' 


The same was made the head of the corner. 

This (head of the corner) came (eyeVero) from the 

Lord's hand {-Trapa Kvplov), 
And is marvellous (davjULaa-Tij) in our eyes. 
This is the day which the Lord made. 
Let us rejoice and be glad in it. 

Now, let us see the altered form in which i Pet ii 6 
and Rom reproduce the O.T. words. 

I Pet ii 6 ff. Because it is contained in scripture 
{■n-epiexei €v ypa(j)ri): Behold^ I lay in Sion a stone 
elect, a chief-corner (stone), honourable, and he 
that believeth on him (it) shall not be put to 

For you, therefore, which believe is the honour : 
but for such as disbelieve,'^ The stone which the 
builders rejected, this was made the head of the 
corner ; and, A stone of stumbling and rock of 

Rom ix 32 f For they stumbled at the rock of 
offence, as it is written : Behold^ I lay in Sion 
a stone of stumbling and a rock of offence, and 
he that believeth on him (it) shall not be put to 

^ 'I5oi) HStj/j.^ iv Stctj^ Xidov ^KkGKTbv 6.Kpoy{i)vi.aXov ^pri/xop, Kai 6 
TTiCTTsiojv iir' avT(p oi) /MTj KaraiaxvvOTJ. 

^ Aldos 6V aTTedoKifJ-aaav ol oiKodofiovvres o^os ^ev-qOrj els KetpaKijv 
yu)vias Kai \l6os Trjootr/crf/x/xaros Kai ir^rpa (XKavSoKov. 

^ 'Idoif Tid7}fjLi iv 2itb»' Mdov TrpocTKdfji./xaTos Kai ir^rpav (TKavSaKoVj Kai 
6 Tricre^iijv ^tt' aury oO KaTaicrxvvd^(7€rai. 


To these may be added for comparison : 

Eph ii 20 Messiah Jesus himself being the chief- 
corner-stone {aKpoywviaiov). 

Now, the first divergence which we notice from the 
LXX is that both Apostles use rlOtifii instead of 
e/uL^dWot) in the quotation from Is xxviii 16. The 
next is that they put ' in Sion ' for ' for the founda- 
tions of Sion.' The third is that they insert the 
words 'upon him (it)' after ' believeth,' The two 
first divergences are justified by the Hebrew : the 
third is not. 

We must remember that in nearly every case 
where St Paul quotes from O.T. he quotes the LXX. 
In Romans he is said by Westcott and Hort to 
quote the O.T. about 88 times ; out of these he is 
said to quote the Hebrew only three times ; and 
of these the first (Rom ix 22) is imaginary as 
regards the Hebrew of Is xiii 5, for it comes 
direct from LXX of Jer 1 (xxvii) 25, as WH also, and 
herein correctly, have noted : the citation in the 
second case is no nearer to the Hebrew than it is 
to LXX (Rom x 15, Is Hi 7): the third citation is 
also equally divided between the LXX and the 
Hebrew, and there is no substantial difference 
between them (Rom xii 19, Deut xxxii 35). Thus 
the two former divergences from the LXX in the 
passages before us (Rom ix 32 and i Pet ii 6 f) are 
only remarkable because they form exceptions to St 
Paul's regular practice. However the principal fact 



is that they agree in adding the words ' upon him ^ 
(it), and the verse is quoted with the same addition 
again in Rom x ii, introduced by the words, 'the 
scripture saith.' 

Next, the interdependence of Rom ix 32 and 
I Pet ii 6 f. appears from the combination of Is viii 14 
with Is xxviii 16, by interpolation in Romans and 
by addition in i Peter. Now a careful observation 
of these two passages in Isaiah will shew that neither 
in LXX nor in the Hebrew original have they affinities 
with each other. They do not belong originally to 
the same section of (I) Isaiah. The earlier passage 
is one in which Jehovah declares that He himself 
shall become a holy thing to those who trust in 
Him without any compromise at all. There is no 
question of a holy place being built. The R.V. 
translation ' sanctuary ' is probably right, but the 
connexion between it and the stone ('even) and the 
rock (tzur) is not only not discernible, but not present 
in the passage by itself The idea of building 
appears first in Is xxviii 16, but here it reaches no 
further than the materials, the foundation-stone, the 
line, and the level. The foundation-stone in Isaiah's 
mind was the Anointed Prince of the tribe of Judah. 
It was not Jehovah Himself as in the former passage, 
but it was His Elect, ' a tried stone, a precious corner 

' It is certain that the thought of Eph ii 18 is reproduced in 
2 Pet i 10, where the stumbling is the opposite of the ' rich provision 
of the entry into the kingdom,' which is here ' the access which we 
have unto the Father.' 


stone of sure foundation.' We are entitled to claim 
for the words a secondary fulfilment in Christ Jesus, 
but the first and primary meaning was the only 
one present to Isaiah. And this fact only increases 
the marvel. 

I Peter does not copy Romans. 

The question then which is forced upon us is how 
and why these two Isaian passages came to be com- 
bined in almost identical terms by Peter and Paul 
in Romans, while Peter and Paul in Ephesians iv 15 f. 
add the third (never before combined with them ^) 

1 Hort says (Ephesians, p. 133) "Now it is true we have no direct 
evidence from St Paul's earlier Epistles that the image of the corner- 
stone was familiar to his rnind. But if we remember that this image 
came from our Lord's own implicit appropriation of the words of 
the psalm to Himself in the pafrable of the wicked husbandmen 
recorded in all the first three Gospels, not to speak of St Peter's 
reference to it before the Sanhedrim as well as afterwards in his 
Epistle, it must be impossible for us to believe that the idea was 
either unknown to St Paul from the day that he became a Christian, 
or was rejected by him. On these then, as on other grounds, the 
negative fact that Christ is not called the Head of the Church in 
the earlier Epistles has no force towards shewing that this Epistle 
must have a different author." On this it may be remarked that 
St Paul did probably know his Psalter thoroughly, both after and 
before his conversion ; but while this is granted, we still ' want to 
know what led him to treat Ps cxviii in this particular connexion in 
which he had never treated it before. We may not assume that he 
knew Matthew which was not written till many years afterwards, nor 
Luke which was not written till some years afterwards, and we 
have no evidence whatever that he knew Mark. 




from Ps cxviii 22 ff., which in its primary sense refers 
to the rebuilding of the temple by Zerubbabel, what- 
ever its date of composition may be. Either we , 
must resort to the mechanical explanation which 
seems to satisfy some commentators, that Peter was 
content to copy ' Romans' ; or there was a common 
origin of the grouping and application of the three. 
Now Zahn has pointed out that Peter "is not copying 
Romans : he knows the prophetic text from his own 
reading of it, for he gives in i Pet ii 6 the attributes 
of the stone ('elect, honourable ') which are omitted 
by Paul but previously quoted by himself in ii 4. 
But his mind retains the conception which Paul had 
given to the prophetic word, and he spins out the 
threads presented to him by Paul in the combination 
of the Isaian passages while he joins on to them the 
verses of P.s cxviii." This is very unsatisfactory on 
Zahn's part. He begins by saying that Peter is not 
copying, and he ends by saying that he has received 
the idea from Paul and works it up consciously ! 
That is next door to copying. Let us have a clear 
idea of what happened. And perhaps we may gain 
some help by observing the subsequent history of the 
citation from Ps cxviii. 

It occurs in Mark xii 10: 'And have ye not read 
this scripture, The stone which the builders .... our 
eyes.' It concludes the parable of the wicked hus- 

It occurs in Luke xx 17 : ' What then is this which 



is written, The stone which the builders rejected, this 
is become the head of the corner. Every one that 
falleth on that stone shall be broken to pieces, but on 
whomsoever it shall fall, it will scatter him as dust.' 
Here again it concludes the same parable. 

It occurs in Matthew xxi 42, where again it con- 
cludes the same parable. ' Have ye never read in the 
scriptures. The stone which the builders .... our eyes ? 
Therefore I say unto you that the kingdom of God 
shall be taken from you and given to a nation that 
doeth the works thereof The words which follow 
' And he that falleth on this stone . . . him as dust ' 
are bracketed by WH and omitted by Tischendorf, 
as introduced by a copyist from Luke. They were 
introduced by Matthew himself if not by a copyist. 
The question whether Matthew had availed himself of 
Luke is too large to be discussed here, but the words 
certainly originate in St Luke, and to this we shall 
return presently. 

It occurs lastly in Acts iv 11: ' This is the stone 
that was set at nought (e^ovdevrjdeli) by you the 
builders, that is made the head of the corner.' 

A Side-Light upon the Lucan Authorship of 
2 Peter. 

Now in the three Synoptists the entire discourse 
which concludes with the citation is the same and 


coherent. The question is put by ' the high priests 
and the scribes with the elders in the temple' to 
Jesus, By what authority doest thou these things ? 
He replies by the counter-question, Whence came the 
baptism of John ? and so involves them in the 
dilemma. (Here Matthew inserts the parable of the 
two sons.) 

Then follows the parable of the wicked husband- 
men in language almost identical in the three 
Gospels, except in one particular which throws an 
unexpected light upon the theory here maintained, 
that Luke wrote the Petrine Epistles. Mark and 
Matthew have given a clue to the identity of ' the 
Mt .\vi 45, builders ' with 'the husbandmen,' which is con- 


Lkxxis. spicuous by its absence in Luke. They have quoted 
just one more expression from the introductory 

isv2. passage in Isaiah than Luke has: 'and built a 
tower.' Obviously the owner employed his own 
labourers to build ; thus the builders can be readily 
identified with the husbandmen in the minds of 
Mark and Matthew. 

Not so does Luke understand the bearing of 
' the builders.' To him the husbandmen have been 
husbandmen for ages past throughout the history 
of the Jewish Church ; the builders, on the other 
hand, are those of the days of Christ, who having 
the materials and the power to build the house of 
God with Jesus as the chief corner-stone, reject 
Him, but at their peril. He expresses this peril of 



Stumbling, and possibly worse, in words which clearly 
enough recall the very same passage of Is viii 14 
which we have seen was familiar with him in this 
connexion in i Pet ii 7 and in i Pet iv 17, and to 
which he also referred in 2 Pet i 10, ' make your 
calling and election sure : for while ye do this ye 
surely shall never stumble ; for thus shall richly 
be provided for you the entrance into the eternal 
kingdom of our Lord.' Only when the thread of 
thought is supplied by the connexion of Is viii 14, 
Is xxviii 15, and Ps cxviii 22, which are all illus- 
trated by the light of Enoch xci 13 (see p. 141 above), 
do we gain the clue to the understanding of passages 
so remote as Luke xx 18 and 2 Pet i 10 f. The 
very expression ' ye shall not surely ' {ov /nij with 
aorist subjunctive) in the latter place takes us back 
to the same construction in Is xxviii 16. These 
facts are most conclusive evidence that none but 
Luke, the author of Luke, can be the author of i 
Peter and of 2 Peter. They are not explained by 
the simple supposition that before writing his Gospel 
Luke had studied the two Epistles carefully. No 
mere reader could have so deeply imbibed their 
inward meaning as to reproduce, in connexion with 
the wicked husbandmen, the thought of the spiritual 
stone of stumbling where St Mark had before him 
only that of the chief corner-stone. 



History of the combined citations. 

The conclusion that we must reasonably draw 
is this. First, the grouping of the two Isaian texts 
was originally made by Paul and Luke as Prophets 
seeking the fulfilment of Isaiah. It was first treated 
by Paul in writing to the Romans. 

Secondly, The two Isaian passages are combined 
by Luke and Peter with Ps cxviii seeking the ful- 
filment of Isaiah, Psalms, and Enoch. And the 
combination is first treated in writing in i Peter. 

Thirdly, The combination of Isaiah with the Psalm 
is made by Paul, Luke, and Peter, seeking the fulfil- 
ment of the three ancient types, and is repeated 
in the writing of the Ephesians as an open seal 
of conciliation of the Apostles. 

Fourthly, The fuller combination is plainly referred 
to by Luke and Peter in 2 Peter in the following 
expressions, 'Ye surely shall not stumble' (Is viii 14): 
• shall be richly supplied ' (2 Pet i 1 1 = ' every joint 
of the supply,' 1 Eph iv 16 = Ps cxviii 22, 23) : 
' partakers of the divine nature ' (2 Pet i 4 with 
verses 5 ff, 'Supply . . . supply . . . supply'; these 
are the 'joints' of Eph iv 15, 16): and to these 
may be added the two closing verses of 2 Peter, ' fall 

^ There is really nothing anatomical in this famous passage of Eph iv 
16: it is all architectural, and it becomes quite. plain when regarded in 
the light of 2 Peter i, but not otherwise. This answers the question on 
p. 104 above. 


{i.e. be shaken) out of your own stedfastness (of 
foundation). But grow . . ' For ctt^pi^od and its 
cognates are frequently used of houses and founda- 
tions, Ecclus iii 9 and elsewhere in LXX. This 
recalls Is xxviii 16. 

Fifthly, It was then rehandled by Luke in Luke, 
so as to give a different turn to the parable of 
the wicked husbandmen from that which is given in 

Sixthly, It was finally referred to by St Luke in 
Acts in the mouth of Peter — only negatively and ac iv 12. 
slightly so far as the stumbling is concerned. It 
may or may not be found in Matthew. 

ne meaning of the term Revelation. 

After this long digression we may now revert to 
our parallelism of i Peter and Ephesians. But first 
the term Revelation requires to be noticed. In i 
Peter St Luke had urged his readers to set their i Pet i 
hopes on the grace that was being brought unto 
them by revelation of Jesus Messiah. The words 
have usually been understood to mean a future gift. 
So R.V. translates ' that is to be brought unto 
you,' but its marginal rendering alone is correct, ' is 
being brought.' The general ignorance of the fact 
that Christian Prophecy was a living gift in the 
CJiurch was shared by the Revisers, as we have seen 


more than once, and they appear to have thought 
that whenever ' revelation ' is mentioned, unless St 
Paul is speaking of his special revelations, it means 
the future appearance of Christ in glory. No doubt 
the Christian mind will be slow to realise the fact 
which these pages are designed to elucidate, but it 
will awaken at length to the violence which any 
other interpretation must do to the plain words of 
the New Testament. Here, for instance, i Peter 
has been describing in the plainest manner the 
current practice of prophecy as understood and 
followed by an earnest and enthusiastic Prophet.^ 
In vain for us modern readers does he do so. He 

iPetiio-i2. uses the aorist tense, and what happened a few 
years before he wrote, when his readers were first 
taught the Gospel, is made by R.V. and the com- 
mentators to refer to the hoary antiquity of Isaiah 

I Pet i s. or Malachi. The time in which i Peter was written 
was indeed to Peter 'the last time,' but though he 
thought that the last time was soon to be con- 
summated in the end of all things, we have no 
right to say that whenever he mentions ' revelation,' 
' apocalypse,' he means the final end of the last 
time any more than the present moment of it. 
Not even in i 5 does ' revealed ' mean the final end 
any more than the present moment. Salvation is 
ever ready to be ' revealed,' and at that present 
moment it was revealed by the medium of prophecy. 

^ The Christian Prophets, p. 152. 


It may be granted that the aorist tense in that 
particular verse favours a moment, such as the final 
end, more than the present tense would have done. 
But this is only because the effort of mind neces- 
sary to realise a moment is less difficult when there 
is a definite future climax anticipated, around and 
upon which the thoughts and words of men have 
clustered more than they have upon any average 
moment which, however intense to the writer when 
he wrote, seems to us like any other in the daily 
course of things when we look back after these 
centuries upon the written word. The volcano is 
ever cooling. ' For from the day that the fathers 2 Pet iii 4, 
fell asleep, all things continue as they were from 
the beginning of the creation.' There was a real 
difficulty at the base of the mockers' mockery, 
which the Christian Prophets had to meet. It is2Corvi2. 
a difficulty with us to-day. ' Behold, now is the 
acceptable time ; behold, now is the day of salva- 
tion.' ' Exhort one another day by day, so long 
as it is called To-day ; lest any one of you be Heb iii 13. 
hardened by the deceitfulness of sin.' On this point 
at least the teaching of the Christian Prophets is 
not obsolete or limited : to-day is all-important 

Still more does this apply to another verse in 
I Peter i 7. The ' revelation ' was a present fact 
resulting from the study of O.T. scripture, and the 
discovery of the fulfilment of types and prophecies. 


In and by such revelation lay ' the praise and honour 
and glory' which would crown the proof of the 
reader's faith. These began now, and would them- 
selves be crowned when He appeared, and they 
would see Him as He is. 

Ephiiis. When then in Ephesians St Paul dwells on the 
' revelation ' ' made to himself, with regard to the 
truth heretofore secret and now declared, that the 
Gentiles are admitted to the fullest equality in the 
Covenant of God, he is also careful to refer to the 

Ephii'is. fact described by Peter, that the same truth had 'been 
now revealed to Messiah's holy Apostles and Pro- 
phets ^ in the spirit' There is a note of holy exul- 
tation in the three-fold emphasis, ' fellow-heirs, 

^ See above, p. 119. Zahn {Einl. ii 358) rather labours to justify the 
use of ' holy ' as a term applied to ' His apostles and prophets in the 
spirit,' and adds : ' It is a matter of indifference to criticism whether 
Paul meant to include himself, or ' by apostles ' meant the Twelve 
apart from himself, as in Rom xvi 7, 1 Cor xv 7. The former is more 
probable in Eph iv 1 1 ; the latter in ii 20. But the same is true of iii 
5, after speaking in iii 3 about the revelation of the mystery to him- 
self, as he further in iii 7 claims only to be the chief personal instru- 
ment for realising the knowledge revealed to the Apostles and Prophets, 
and as he calls himself the lesser (but the word is really ' leaster ') 
of all saints, not in quite the same language as that of i Cor xv 9.' 
But as Zahn fully recognises that Paul calls himself an Apostle, and 
calls all believers 'holy,' even the licentious Corinthians, whom he 
urges to live up to their name, it seems quite needless to refine upon 
meanings. The chief point is that Prophets are those who receive 
Apocalypses, Apostles are those Prophets who go on Missionary 
journeys. Evangelists are those who preach the Gospel without being 
Prophets, though they go on Missions. There is no difficulty to those 
who accept the view that Christian Prophecy was a living agency of 



fellow-members of the body, and fellow-partakers 
of the promise in Messiah Jesus,' which there is notEphiue. 
in the companion passage by the Apostle of the 
circumcision, who still states the truth, and declares i Pet 1 8-12. 
the rejoicing of the readers. 

I Peter. 
i 12 To whom it was revealed 
because . . . for you they 
ministered what was 
now announced to you 
through them who 
preached the Gospel to 
you by the holy spirit. 

iv II If any one minister, let 
him do so as of the 
strength which God 

iv 10 Cf. Good stewards of the 
i 8 With joy unspeakable. 

Eph Hi. 

5 As it was now revealed to 

Messiah's holy apostles 
and prophets in the 

6 Through the Gospel of 

which I became a minis- 
ter, according to the . . 
grace of God given unto 
9 Stewardship of the mystery. 

8 The untraceable ' riches of 

1 1 We have the fulness of 

' The word dj'ejix''""'"^'"' here and in Rom xi 33 is by no means 
merely rhetorical. It refers to the searching of the O.T. scriptures for 
the types and prophecies of the Messiah. Thus it is combined as a 
parallel with ' unsearchable,' which comes from the very same word 
that is used in i Pet i 10. The R.V. rendering, like A.V., is wrong. 
It means ' never enough traced out ' — there is always more to trace out. 
But ivCKkaKiiTif is like ^fix"^""'^'"') ^"d means 'joy that has never been 
enough expressed yet,' i.e. by those who have heard (he Christian 
Prophets, and SeBo^ixaiiivtf is 'joy that is completely glorified.' 'Ye 
rejoice (a.ya.\\i.S.Te) with a joy complete in glory, but not yet complete 
in expression.' There is clearly here a reference to the speaking with 
tongues. Certain it is that Ps xvi 9 contains the words, ' my tongue 
rejoiced,' Tr/oKKLaaaTo r/ yXSirird /iOU, and that it is quoted by Luke in 
Peter's mouth, Ac ii 25, as the type of the Pentecostal gift of tongues. 
Hence the expression i Pet i 12 end. See p. 123 above. 



I Peter. 
12 Which things the angels 
desire to look down into. 

iv 10 Manifold grace of God. 

i 15 Him that called you. 

ii 5 To offer up sacrifices ac- 
ceptable to God. 

i 5 Guarded by God's power 
through faith. 

ii 5 Ye are being built as 
living stones. 

ii 6 He that believeth upon 
Him (as a foundation). 

iv 1 1 That God may be glori- 
fied in all things through 
Jesus Messiah, to whom 
is the glory and the 
might unto the ages of 
the ages. Amen. 

Eph Hi. 
10 That it may be made known 

now to the principalities 

and powers in the 

heavenly places. 
10 The manifold wisdom of 

12 We have the approach. 

16 To be strengthened with 
power through His 

18 Having been rooted and 

21 To God be the glory in the 
Church and in Messiah 
Jesus unto all the gene- 
rations of the age of the 
ages.-* Amen. 

The ' unity ' of the Ephesians is not contrasted with 
private judgment. 

We now approach the practical and hortatory por- 
tion of Ephesians, only to find the same remarkable 
parallelism with i Peter as before. But no sooner 
is the exhortation begun than St. Paul launches forth 
upon the praise of unity, which we must remember is 
contrasted with the duality of Jew and Gentile, in 
accordance with his previous remarks, much more 

^ These are in eternity at least, if not on earth. The phrase lends no 
support to the idea of a late date for the writing of Ephesians. 



than with the plurality of opinions rising from the Eph " 15 f 
private judgment of members of the Church, how- 
ever much the 'Prayer for Unity' of 171 5 may have 
turned the language against ' our unhappy divisions.' 
Eph iv must be read with Eph ii, and in the sense of 
an Epistle of conciliation. The reference to the 
plurality of offices in the Church finds its origin in 
I Peter. Not even the Descent before the Ascension 
is omitted in Ephesians, though it is based now upon 
canonical Scripture, whereas i Peter based it upon 
uncanonical. We shall have the Book of Enoch 
quoted soon afterwards in Eph v 14 f 

I Peter. 

iii 9 Lowly and not rendering 
evil for e\il. 

iii 15 With meekness. 

iv 8 Having your mutual love 

iv 10 Each according as he re- 
ceived a gift {x^P'-'^ !'■'>■) ■ 

iii 19 He went and preached to 
the spirits in prison. 

iv 6 The Gospel was preached 
to the dead. 


iv 10 Ministering it to one 
another : if any one 
ministers . . . if any one 

ii 2 As new-born babes, long 
for the reasonable milk 
without guile. 

Eph iv. 
2 With all lowliness 


2 Forbearing one another in 

7 To each one of us was 
given grace (x"P") ac- 
cording to the measure 
of the gift. 

9 That he ascended what is 
it but that he had de- 
scended into the lower 
parts of the earth ? 

1 1 £ He gave some . . . evan- 
gelists . . . untothework 
of ministering. 

13 Unto a fullgrown man . 

that we may be no'^ more 
infants (c-ijttioi). 

^ This is a very remarkable sudden contrast in the midst of a series of 
parallels, and along with that of 'no more strangers' (p. 187 above), is 
conclusive proof, if any were needed, that Ephesians is composed after 



I Peter. 

ii 2 That ye may be made to 
grow in him unto sal- 

ii 7 The head of the corner. 

ii 5 Ye are being built up a 
spiritual house. 

iv 2 Ye should no more live 
by the lusts of men. . . . 

iv 3 For the past is enough to 
have wrought the will of 
the Gentiles. 
In abominable idolatries. 

ii 9 Whocalled us out of dark- 

ii lo Whooncewerenot(God's) 

iv 3 Having journeyed (far) in 
kinds of lasciviousness. 

ii 3 Ifyou have tasted that the 
Lord is good. 

iii 21 Not the putting off of the 
filth of the flesh. 

iii 1 6 Your good manner of life 

in Christ, 
iii 1 8 Quickened in the spirit 

(as a type of baptism). 

Eph iv. 

15 Let us grow unto him in 
all things, who is the 
head,^ Messiah, from 
whom all the body being 
fitly framed and knit 
together . . . maketh 
the growth of the body 
unto the building of 
itself in love. 

17 Ye should no more walk 
as the Gentiles walk. 

1 7 In the vanity of their mind 

{i.e. idolatry). 

18 Having been darkened in 

their understanding, 
estranged from the life of 

19 Gave themselves up to 


21 If so be ye have heard him . 

and been taught in him. 

22 That ye put off . . . the 

old man. 
25 Having put off falsehood. 

22 According to your former 

manner of life. 

23 Renewed in the spirit of 

your mind. 

I Peter; i.e. slightly after it in time, but I should think only just long 
enough for the writer of Ephesians to have seen I Peter, and to bring out 
the teaching of the other side of the same cornparison of Christians to 
infants. For I Peter also proceeds at once to urge growth unto matu- 
rity in the same verse. 

^ It seems clear that the literary origin of Eph iv 15, which presents 
the complete fusion of the two metaphors of building and bodily grmith, 
is to be found in adding to the thought of the head, which is originally 
that of Ps cxviii 'the head of the corner,' the single and natural idea 
of a body, while the idea of a Temple is retained as fundamental. 
Again, Ephesians is rather more elaborate than I Peter. 



While the parallelism of the two baptismal passages 
I Pet iii 18 ff. and Eph iv 20 ff. is unmistakeable, 
it is also plain that they represent different 
aspects of the symbolism. Ephesians has dispensed 
with the symbolism of the ark and deluge, 
in which we have already noticed the meaning of 
antitype} just as it omitted the reference earlier in 
the chapter to the spirits in prison, while preserving 
the ' descent to the lower parts of the earth.' Already 
baptism is indissolubly linked with the humiliation 
and exaltation of Christ. Ephesians refrains from 
using the word 'baptism,' laying stress on 'teaching' 
and ■ newness of creation,' as symbolised in the 
clothing of the candidates, while i Peter names 
' baptism ' and also speaks of the ' interrogation of a i Pet iii 21. 
good conscience towards God ' and ' quickening by the 
spirit,' and uses the symbolism of ' clothing ' and of 
planting. The corresponding passage in the Colos- coi ii n ff. 
sians combines in the same way the distinct ideas 
of ' clothing ' and ' burial ' with the name of ' baptism ' 
and ' newness of life.' The corresponding passage in 
Romans mentions baptism symbolised by 'burial,' Rom vi 4. 
not by 'clothing,' but by 'planting,' and connected Rom vii 4. 
with newness of life. All the four passages therefore 
belong to the same stage in the evolution of doctrine. 

I Peter. 
i 22 In obedience to the truth 
unto brotherly love un- 

Eph iv. 
25 Speak truth . . 
are members 

for we 
one of 

1 See p. I 

37 above. 



I Peter. 

iii 1 1 ' Let him seek peace, and 

ensue it.' 
V 9 Resist the devil. 

iv 15 Let none of you suffer as 

a thief, 
iii 10 Let him stop his tongue 

from evil and his Hps 

that they speak no 

iv 10 To one another as good 

stewards of God's 

iv 14 The spirit of God resteth 

upon you. 
i 18 Ye were redeemed. 
ii I Having put away all 

malice and all guile 
. and envies and 

all evil speakings. 

iii 8 Be ye all likeminded . . . 
tenderhearted . . . be- 
cause ye were called to 
inherit blessing. 

I Peter. 

ii 21 Because Christ also 
suffered for you, leav- 
ing you an example 
that ye should follow 
his steps. 

i 15 As he that called you is 
holy, be ye also holy, 
iv 13 But as ye are partakers 
of Chjist's sufferings, 

Eph iv, 

26 ' Be ye angry and sin not' 

27 Neither give place to the 

vi II Stand against the wiles 
of the devil. 

28 Let him that stealeth steal 

no more. 

29 Let no corrupt speech pro- 

ceed out of your mouth. 

Give grace unto the 

30 Ye were sealed by the holy 

spirit unto the day of 

31 Let all bitterness and 

wrath and anger and 
clamour and railing be 
put away from you with 
all malice. 

32 Be ye kind one to another, 

tenderhearted . . . even 
as God in Christ forgave 

Eph V. 

I Be ye imitators of God . . . 
and walk in love, even 
as Christ loved you and 
gave himself for you an 
offering and sacrifice to 

4 As becometh saints (holy). 

But rather thanksgiving is 

' It is a remarkable fact that St Paul nowhere mentions ' the devil ' 
except in Ephesians and in the Pastoral Epistles. 



1 Peter. 
iv 5 Wlio shall render an 

account to him that is 

ready to judge quick 

and dead. 
iv 4 That ye do not run with 

ii 9 Who called you out of 

darkness into his mar- 
vellous light, 
pp. 134 ff. See reff. to Enoch in 

I Peter, 
ii 15 So is the will of God, 

that in doing' good ye 

should silence the 

ignorance of the fool- 
ish men. 
iv 3 f Winebibbings ... to 

the same flood of 

iii 15 Sanctify Christ as Lord 

in your hearts. 

iii I Wives being subject^ to 

their own husbands, 
iii 7 Husbands likewise . . . 

assigning honour to the 

wife as to the weaker 

As also fellowheirs of the 

grace of life, 
iii 2 Your chaste manner of 

life in fear. 
6 Not fearing with any 


In regard to the duties of wives to husbands i 
Peter is more exphcit, and employs the illustration 
of Sarah. In the duty of husband to wife Ephesians 

ido-uWa nowhere else in N.T. but once in Tit i 6; cf. Lk xv 13 
dffuTws of the Prodigal. 

'The same participial construction without a. verb in both caaes is 

Eph V. 

6 For these things the wrath 

of God Cometh upon 
the children of disobed- 

7 Be ye not partakers with 


8 Ye were once darkness, but 

now are light in the 

14 is from Enoch xci 10 (see 

below, p. 281.) 
17 Be not ye foolish, but 

understand what the 

will of the Lord is. 

18 Be not drunk with wine, 

wherein is excess.' 

19 Singing hymns and psalms 

in your heart to the 

22 Wives* being subject to 

their own husbands. 
25 Husbands, love your wives 

. . as Christ loved the 



For we are members of 
Christ's body. 
33 The wife that she may fear 
her husband. 



is much more elaborate, drawing out the comparison 
of Christ and the Church. Ephesians alone adds a 
paragraph on the duties of children to parents and 
the converse. And it has unfolded the ideas of light 
as an agency of the fertility of works and their test. 
Romxmi2. Also we may note a modification in St Paul. In 
Romans the works of darkness are mentioned in 
connexion with the works of the law, as if to imply 
— after all that had been said in that Epistle about 
works — that they were of that character. But in 
Ephesians a distinction is made, and we read of ' the 
unfruitful works of darkness ' ; in other words, the 
earlier tone of severity towards works is modified, and 
they are divided into fruitful, which grow in light, 
and unfruitful, which belong to darkness. Lastly, 
'the hidden man of the heart' of i Peter expands 
in Ephesians into hymns and psalms in the heart. 

Rom xi 6, 

Eph V J I. 

I Pet iii 4. 

I Peter. 
ii 18 Servants being subject in 
all fear to your masters. 

ii 16 Not as using your free- 
dom for a cloke of your 
But as slaves of God. 

i 17 Who without respect of 
persons judgeth ac- 
cording to each man's 
V 8 Your adversary the devil 
. . resist. 

v 14 Peace unto you all who 
are in Christ. 

Eph VI. 

5 Slaves, obey your human 

lords with fear and 

6 Not with eye-service. 

But as slaves of Christ doing 

the will of God. 
8 Each if he do any good shall 

receive it from the Lord 

. . . there is no respect 

of persons with him. 
1 1 That ye may be able to stand 

against the wiles of the 

23 Peace to the brethren and 

love with faith. 

'J/F CASE AT LAW 21 1 

Genuineness of the Epistle to the Ephesians. 

The rest of chapter vi contains first a description 
of the spiritual panoply, which is chiefly based, not as 
some have supposed upon a description of the Roman Eph vi 30. 
soldier who guarded the Apostle as a prisoner with a 
chain, but upon the words of Is lix 17, to which he 
has before had recourse, though more briefly, in 
writing i Thess v 8. From this he glides into a 
request for his readers' prayers on behalf of his 
approaching trial before Caesar at Rome. He 
mentions this so simply and artlessly that the 
unprejudiced reader entertains no doubt that the 
Epistle is St Paul's. He mentions his trial to 
the Ephesians, as to the Colossians, in the very words coi iv 7. 

Eph vi 21. 

of Philippians (ra /car' e/xe ' my case '), and the only pwi i 12. 
reasonable explanation of these references is the 
simple one that Ephesians and Colossians were 
written before the hearing and Philippians after 
it. He was now about to 'open his mouth' 
in open court ; he prays that ' speech may be 
vouchsafed him ' by God ' to make known with 
all freedom the revealed truth of the Gospel.' 
And so it happened. ' His imprisonment became 
manifest by Christ in all the praetor's (Caesar's) 
court and among all the rest of his courtiers, and the 
brethren were more abundantly encouraged to speak 
the word of God fearlessly.' 


Lightfoot was right in maintaining that the Philip- 
pians was the last written of the four Epistles of the 
captivity, and that they all belong to the first 
captivity at Rome, and not to that of Caesarea. 

Acxxviii. There is no difficulty in supposing that Peter was 
in Rome before Paul, Luke, and Aristarchus arrived ; 
that the understanding with Peter was the first thing, 
as was natural, to occupy the three; that consequently 
I Peter was written first, then Ephesians, Colossians, 
and Philemon ; that the first hearing of the case in 
in the Praetor's court followed, after much delay; 
that Philippians was written last, but before the end 
of the two years of Paul's detention at Rome. Nor 
does there seem any reason to doubt that Lightfoot 
and Hort are right in identifying ' the Epistle (in its 

Coiivi6. circulation) from Laodicea' to Colossae with our 
Epistle to the Ephesians. St Paul orders that it be 
read in Church at Colossae, and likewise that his 
Epistle to the Colossians be circulated and read 
publicly at Laodicea. This express order for public 
reading had a reason in the one case which it had 
not to the same extent in the other ; for the Ephe- 
sians was his message urbi et orbi of conciliation with 
Peter ; but it was unnecessary to declare this fact 
upon the housetops so long as the satisfaction was 
done to the partisans who craved it and to the truth 


To Whom was Ephesians Addressed? 

The question still remains, to whom precisely the 
Epistle of Paul ' to the Ephesians ' was addressed. 
The documentary evidence for the present title ' to 
the Ephesians' and for the present words in i i ' in 
Ephesus ' may be seen discussed by Hort in his post- 
humous lectures.^ Zahn agrees with Hort that the 
letter was an encyclical or circular epistle, by St 
Paul himself, carried by Tychicus through Asia, his 
own province, and intended to be read in church 
first at Laodicea and next at Colossae, being the 
very Epistle mentioned in Col iv 16, but addressed 
to all the churches in Asia. Zahn offers a suggestion 
which appears to have everything to commend it 
when he says : ' If, when the Epistles of Paul were made 
into a collection, Ephesians received a title according 
to the analogy of the rest, and the unsuitable name^ 

^ The Romans and the Ephesians. Prolegomena, p. 75 ff- 

^ This name is unsuitable, Zahn thinks, because certain passages Eph i 15 f. 
imply that the recipients had no personal knowledge of the writer, gpij |" ^i. 
Hort, on the other hand, thinks rightly that i 15 is not inappropriate 
in reference to tidings about the present condition of the Ephesian 
church (and other churches near it), from which St Paul had long been 
separated. In the other two passages, iii 2, iv 21, the ihj^ riKoiaaTe 
means ' if, as I suppose,' with a rhetorical or appealing force where no 
real doubt is intended. It may be added that the contrast of the 
parallel in I Pet ii 3 where the plain ' if is used is here instructive. St 
Paul's 2nd person plural may mean (l) individual readers, or (2) a 
group of readers, or (3) a particular church, or (4) a group of churches. 
Well might he say ' if, as I suppose, ye have heard of my stewardship 


To the Ephesians was selected for it, we must 
assume that an accurate and genuine tradition about 
the destination of the Epistle was not available by 
those who made the collection.' How the error on 
the part of the editor or some later copyist, of 
addressing it to the Ephesians, arose and was per- 
petuated is not inexplicable. Ephesus was the 
jMetropolis of the Province of Asia, both ecclesiasti- 
cally and politically. Through Ephesus lay the road 
on which the Asiatic churches communicated, chiefly, 
at least, with those of other lands. Thus this Epistle 
would pass to all churches (in Asia Minor) from 
Ephesus. But if it was circulated as a letter ' from 
Ephesus,' it was just as easy for it to be supposed 
to be addressed to the Church of Ephesus as it was 
Col iv i6. for !Marcion to suppose, as he did suppose, the ' letter 
from Laodicea ' to be a ' letter to the Laodiceans.' 

The original draft of the letter probably had no 
title whatever, just as it is probable that none of the 
Pauline letters to churches had a title written by St 
Paul or his amanuensis. The title would be left for 
the collector to add. It is probable too that the 
autograph did not contain the words ' in Ephesus ' in 
i I. The place was left blank, to be filled up in each 
case with a different local address.^ The words, how- 

as Apostle to the Gentiles ' — whatever you may have heard of St 
Peter's apostleship as well, and whatever you may have thought of the 
Rom vi I ;. different spheres and ' types of teaching ' of us two. 

1 See Westcott and Hort, The N. T. in Creek, vol. ii. A'otes on 
Select Readings, p. 1 23 f. 

' WHO ARE,' ' WHO IS' 215 

ever, are ' a legitimate but unavoidably partial supple- 
ment to the true text, filling up a chasm which might 
be perplexing to a reader in later times.' ' The Epistle 
would be communicated to the great mother church 
(of Ephesus) first.' 

They in Ephesus WHO ARE : Jesus WHO IS 
Lord Messiah. 

But there is one noteworthy feature in the address 
which should not be passed over, though it seems to 
have failed hitherto to receive its right explanation. 
What is the meaning of 'them who are' (to?? ouo-iv)! 
The answer is to be found in the explanation, given 
above (p. 15), of 'the Church which is.' The Apostle ac xiu i. 
Paul was as anxious as Luke was to emphasise in his 
Epistles at the outset, and rather more so as time 
went on, the great truth that Christian believers were 
the covenant people of God, free-holders of the in- 
heritance which lasts throughout the ages, not in any 
mere titular sense, but as a deeply real fact. Not 
only did they possess the true name of Jehovah when 
they transferred it to the Saviour Jesus, as Kvpio's 
Lord — that was the titular sense — which He had 
vindicated for Himself when He incurred the charge 
of blasphemy by the Jews. The incident as recorded jnvUiss. 
in the Fourth Gospel may not have been known to 
St Paul ; but the open confession before the High 


Mkxiv62. Priest, as recorded in Mark, must certainly have been 
known to him, even if he never saw Mark, for the ' I 
AM' was the ground of blasphemy on which He 
actually was brought to crucifixion : and this fact 
must have been widely known. The titular possession 

Romxg. of the Christian, who 'called Jesus Lord' with the 
confession of his lips, was therefore one which 
identified him with the very charge of blasphemy 
on which the Saviour laid down His life for the world. 
' He that cometh to God must believe that HE IS.' 
The same was true of him who came to Christ. 

But the other fact was a reality of deep importance. 
It has been welP said : 'No greater gift do we owe 
to Christianity than the conception and consecration 
of Personality : and every influence that confuses and 
disturbs it softens the very nerve of modern civilisa- 
tion.' That was the real property of believers which 
St Paul had in mind when he addresses the readers as 
' them who ARE,' '^ the sense of personality which was 

^ James Martineau, Essays, etc., vol. iv. p. 313, "The Relation 
between Ethics and Religion. " 

^ Origen was right, therefore, in noticing the expression, though, of 
course, it is not peculiar to this passage ; and right in interpreting it 
absolutely, and in reference to Ex iii 14, ' I AM ' ; nor does he deserve 
the slighting remark of Jerome ('unnecessary refinement'), which is 
probably directed upon Origen, who had provided him with most 
of his remarks in the Commetitary written nearly 200 years later. 
Origen sees another reference to the same thought in I Cor i 28. Hort 
says, Bphesia7is, p. 86 : ' Certainly no one could now be satisfied to follow 
Origen in putting a transcendental force into rois oBo-iy. . . .' But he 
immediately goes on to shew that the same essential meaning as is 



in each individual, and was the basis iirmly laid of 
that character which distinguishes modern civilisation 
from ancient, and will ever distinguish it in propor- 
tion as Christian faith is alive and healthy. The best 
guidance that we have then on the whole is the read- 
ing of the two best MSS. N and B, which give the fol- 
lowing translation of the opening of the Epistle : No 
title. ' Paul Apostle of Messiah Jesus through God's 
will to the Saints who Are and believe (God) in (by) 
Messiah Jesus,' The meaning is 'to those who 
belong to the Eternal Covenant and Name and 
confess their belief in God by their belief in Jesus 
as Messiah.' No more inclusive terms could be 
applied to those who were Christians at this time. 
Had St Paul written ' and to them who believe in 
Christ,' he would have laid himself open, by the use 
of the words and to them, to the charge of having 
divided the Jewish from the Gentile believers ; he 
might have been called one of the Separaters of Jude 
19 : he would have done the very opposite of what 
he meant to do in writing the Epistle. 

How far into Asia and the other provinces of Asia 
Minor the Epistle would penetrate was not so much 
the question as whether it was an open circular letter 
to all who by this time accepted the faith that Jesus 
was the Messiah and was Head of the organic Body 

given on this page (above) may be obtained from the koX, ' the com- 
bination of the old title of " Saints" with the distinctive characteristic 
of Christians ' ! 


and Cornerstone of the Spiritual House, which was 
building and growing on the foundation laid by the 
Apostles and other Prophets. The Epistle places 
these latter in their proper position, and implies that 
amongst and in spite of all differences they were alike 
engaged in the holy work of edifying the Body, and 
could not vitally disagree. If it should be asked why 
the Epistle was not directed plainly to the brethren of 
' Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia ' as 
I Peter had been, the answer is easy : to do so would 
have been to do too much : it would have impHed 
that the claims to be satisfied were those of ' exact 
justice,' whereas they were those of ' the gentleness of 
2 Cor X I. Christ,' the sweet reasonableness of the Gospel. The 

Phil iv 5. '^ 

I Tim iii 3. harm that St Paul had done in writing Gal ii could 
not be undone, nor could it be redressed with exacti- 
tude, nor did St Peter expect such redress. He had 
addressed all those whom St Paul had addressed, and 
many more in the four adjacent provinces. St Paul 
now addressed an indefinite number of believers, 
possibly more and possibly less than i Peter would 
reach. Perhaps, too, we may conclude that while 
I Peter would enter Asia Minor by the port of Sinope, 
as Hort supposes, ^ ' Ephesians ' would enter by that 
of Ephesus, as Zahn suggests : so the whole Christian 
population would be approached from opposite geo- 
graphical sides with the gentle tidings of a Gospel of 

Eph i 20, iv conciliation : Glory to God in the highest and on 

lO) vi 9. 

^ Comm. on i Peter, ad fin. 



earth peace, to men of goodwill. Among all the Eph 1114, 15, 

17, iv 3, vi 

discourses delivered upon the Angel-song, none hash's-. ^ 
ever been so complete and so telling as the Epistle 
to the Ephesians. 

Zahn on the Genuineness of Ephesians. 

The above has been written entirely without regard 
to the writings of Eaur, which the present writer 
has not studied. But as I agree with Baur that 
Ephesians is a letter of conciliation, though he 
would assign it to the middle of the second century 
and I place it in the first, the following remarks 
of Zahn are noteworthy:^ "The feebleness of the 
negative criticism on Ephesians appears also in its 
inability to assign a credible object of the fabrica- 
tion. (I.) According to Baur [Paulus, ii 39 /), both 
Epistles (Eph and Col) have not so much the 
theoretical object, of ' setting forth the higher idea 
of the Person of Christ, which they contain,' as the 
practical object of combining the Heathen- Christiati 
and Jewish-Christian parties, and so preparing the 
way for the establishment of the oae Christian 
Church : and again ' the complete coalition of born 
Jews and Heathens into a concluded fellowship in 
Christianity' is quoted in the first instance as the 
object at all events of Ephesians. It is also 

^ Einl. i 361. 


relevant to this contrast and contest that (II.) Holtz- 
mann {Krit., 303) makes the re-arisen Paul " (this, of 
course, is metaphorical for the Pauline scholar of 
the second century whom he supposes to have 
written Ephesians) " upraise a word of triumph and 
peace over the Churches founded by Paul. But where^ 
do we. find a trace of the readers requiring an 
admonition to peace in this connexion .' It is true 
Eph ii 11-22 deals with the hostile opposition which 
subsisted before the appearance of Christ, and is 
removed in His death. But we hear nothing of 
this opposition having survived in a new form or 
continued as a hostile opposition of the Jewish and 
Heathen Christians even where the Gospel of Peace 
had found acceptance within the one House of the 
Church which embraced Jew and Heathen alike : 
we only hear the full-toned testimony of the com- 
plete establishment of peace and the subsisting 
equality and unity of those who were formerly Jews 
and Heathens. Nothing transpires^ of occurrences 
which have endangered the concord between the 
Jewish and the Heathen Christians, as in Gal 
ii 1-14 or Acts xv, or of admonitions to mutual 

^ The present writer ventures to think that the answer to this question 
is given in the present work, pp. i63ff., which were written without any 
reference to the views of Zahn, Holtzmann, and Baur, the question 
itself being obvious enough. 

^ How little has ' transpired ' of any kind of Christian feeling before 
Justin Martyr? But we know that the Apostles and their followers 
were human, and therefore Gal ii had results, which Zahn glides over. 


forbearance of both classes, as in Rom xvi 13. 

As the readers are addressed collectively and Ephu 2,11 

iii I. 

generally as Heathens by birth/ without an 
allusion anywhere to Jewish Christians amongst 
them or even near them, this admonition can have 
nothing to do with the opposition of Jews and 
Heathens within Christendom. But as to the 
relation of these Churches to the whole of Christen- 
dom, we hear nothing. Had the author's object 
been (I), he has used every means to conceal it and 
none to attain it.^ But even with regard to the 
supposed object (II), we observe the absence of even 
one word of triumphant joy upon the life-work of 
Paul, which had thriven so in spite of all hostility. 
And naturally such a word is too much for this 
false Paul to choose to utter ; for its utterance 
would have placed him in a false position in open 
Churches which had arisen apart from any assist- 
ance of Paul ! Nor does he, in fact, especially 
praise them. A pseudo-Paul, however feeble, would 
have found in passages like i Th i 2-10, ii 19 f , iv 9, 

^This statement of Zahn ignores the possibility of the Heathen 
Christians having been Jewish proselytes before they became Christians. 
That is a vital question for the understanding of St Paul's position. 
See p. 186 above. 

^ I should exactly invert this statement. St Paul has used no means 
to conceal, and every means to express, his joy at the union of the two 
currents of Christian teaching, that led by himself as the Apostle to the 
Gentiles including those who had become Jewish proselytes, and that 
led by St Peter as the Apostle to the born Jews. For he knew that 
the union of the leaders was the union of the followers. 


2 Th i 3 f., Phil i 5, iv i, 15, some language for his 

Paul if he had to express his joyful pride in his 

fpJjL.'s. Churches. That Paul had heard of these Asiatic 

tph 111 2. 

Christians, and that they had heard of him, is not 
an actual merit ; and that they had heard of one 
another's general well-being is far from being a 
victory to be triumphantly announced. Or where 
should ' we have read anything of the preceding 
contest, without which we cannot, of course, speak 
of a victory'? (III.) The measure of uncircumstan- 
tial inventions is only complete if we again take 
censure and punishment to be the object of the 
forgery.^ For where in Ephesians do we find such 
:Eph ii I, iv censure ? The earlier life in heathenism of the persons 

£ph iv I, addressed is severely noticed, and they are admon- 

20 f, 32, J ' J 

ished to walk aright. But with so many undoubted 
Epistles of Paul before him, with their testimonies 
based on actual life and directed against heathen 
wickedness, the forger would never have needed to 
invent another testimony of the same scope and 

Thus does Zahn dispose of objections again§t the 
genuineness of Ephesians. The passage here trans- 
lated and abridged is only the conclusion of several 
pages devoted to this question, but on the whole 
I think it does not misrepresent either his special 
pleading or his energetic reasoning, which is, with 
some deductions, convincing. But when we come 

^ Holtzmann, 304. 

V 1. 



to examine into Zahn's own account of the object 
and origin of Ephesians, we seem to find a certain 
vagueness and obscurity. He saysi^ 'It is incon- 
testable that St Paul not merely felt himself pledged 
to the missionary preaching over the whole uncon- 
verted heathen world, but also took under the care Rom i 14. 
of his heart all Churches already existing.^ If heaCorxiss 
addressed a copious Epistle to a Church like the 
Romans, which did not belong to his proper mis- 
sionary province, but only lay on the way of his 
future travels and labours, it is likewise intelligible 
that he felt himself bound to watch over and pro- 
mote the development of the Churches in the 
province of Asia, where he had laid the foundation 
in his three years of work at Ephesus, from which 
centre the others had received the Gospel, and to 
do this all the more if he was accused, as at 
Colossae and Laodicea, of failing to fulfil this obli- 
gation, and if the other Churches were threatened, 
as these two were, with the danger of being misled 
into an unsound Christianity.' 

What was included in St Paul's sphere of work ? 

Now, even if this be intelligible, a caveat must be 
entered against the latter part of the statement 
claimed as incontestable. For it would require 

^ Einl. i 351. ^ 'Already existing ' is Zahn's own comment. 


more space than can be here afforded to examine 
into the question of St Paul's sphere of work 
except in regard to one particular point : How far 
a congregation of Jewish Christians, arising in a 
place which no Apostle had visited, let us suppose 
in the centre of Asia Minor, would be considered, 
by themselves or by St Paul, to belong to his sphere 
of work ? Zahn boldly asserts that Rome did not 
belong to St Paul's proper missionary province. 
This is an astounding statement about one who 
says, " I must see Rome also." Why did St Paul 
say this ? Was it merely that he might call there 
on his way to Spain .' Yet what else do Zahn's 
words mean ? St Paul was consumed with a 
Rom xv23ff. passionate desire to visit Rome, where he had been 

Ac xxiii II 

solemnly instructed by the Lord that he ' must bear 
witness concerning' Him. And it seems clear from 
the last chapter of Acts that some Roman Christians 
believed that they were part of his province. We 
need not refer to the division of the Roman Empire 
into portions, which, as we have seen above, 
so deeply affected his entrance into Macedonia: 
though if Macedonia was one portion in his 
mind, there must have been others — Greece, lUy- 
ricum, Italy, Africa, Spain, Gaul. But in proof of 
A.; xxviii 15. what the Roman brethren felt about St Paul, let 
us see how they behaved towards him. When St 
Paul under guard with Luke and Aristarchus had 
landed at Puteoli, 141 miles from Rome, and 



passed on by land as far as Forum Appii (43 miles 
from Rome), they were met by some Christians 
from Rome who came to do them honour, having 
heard from Puteoli of their approach. Another 
detachment of the brethren was ready at Tres 
Tabernae, 10 miles further on. ' On seeing them 
Paul gave thanks to God and took courage.' What 
gave him the encouragement was the prospect which 
the brethren held out of restoring unity with St 
Peter and his followers ' of the circumcision.' The 
account is not inconsistent indeed with the view 
that these friends belonged to the sphere of St 
Peter's work, and that St Peter himself had been 
already in Rome before this, and was there now. 
Among the Roman Christians there were some ■ of 
the circumcision,' and some of these were his friends, coUvn. 
as was Aristarchus, his fellow-traveller from Caesarea, 
while others were actively engaged in opposing 
him. Even the latter were ' preaching the Christ,' Phii i 17 1. 
whether they could justly claim to preach a gospel 
of Christ or not. If St Paul could rejoice at Messiah 
being preached at Rome even falsely and in partisan 
spirit, we must infer that there was at least one 
party of Roman Christians who, after his presence 
there for a year (more or less), did not acknow- 
ledge his leadership. And we must further infer 
that at least some of the circumcision party held 
by St Peter. ' The greater part of the brethren pmi i 14. 
confident in the Lord dare, the more abundantly 


for my bonds, to utter the word of God fearlessly.' 
But on the other hand these expressions, whether 
they betoken friendly sympathy or unfriendly rivalry, 
do not militate against the facts that St Paul had 
had, long before he became a Roman prisoner, 
a definite object in coming to Rome ; that his 
approach was the signal for an eager welcome, and 
that exertions were made by Roman Christians to 
meet him a long way off and escort him to the city; 
that there had been a definite division of apostolic 
spheres of work a few years before : and above all, 
that he could not have addressed his Epistle to 
the Romans if he had no locus standi as an Apostle 
at least to some of them. 

The above statement of Zahn must then be set 
aside entirely as being unsatisfactory where it is 
not vague. The more it is considered in the light 
of the evidence we possess, especially the Epistles 
(Eph, Col, Philem, Phil), of the Roman ^ captivity, 
the Petrines, Acts, and Romans — the last written 
some three years before Paul's arrival in Rome — the 
more impossible it becomes to treat his visit as 
anything but a part of his divine destiny ((5e() and 
duty, which he would have carried out as a free 
man if not as a prisoner. What the evidence points 
to is this : — Paul's sphere of work consisted of all 
persons of Gentile birth whether they were Jewish 

^ The view of Weiss and others that these Epistles belong to the 
captivity at Caesarea is discussed by Hort (Ephesiaiis), and answered. 


proselytes or not; St Peter's sphere consisted of 
Jews by birth. The importance of this distinction, 
especially as regards the proselytes, cannot here 
be set forth as it deserves. 

Still as regards the Ephesian readers whom St 
Paul addresses as ' Gentiles,' we have no difficulty 
in seeing that his words apply to them equally well 
whether they had or had not become Jews before 
conversion to Christianity. 

On the other hand in regard to the occasion of 
Ephesians, we can also see that if the relations of 
Paul with Peter had been what human nature under 
the grace of God requires them to have been, it 
is certain that something like the conciliation here 
suggested took place at some time, and if so we 
may safely say it took place just before the 
' Ephesians ' was written, and so must perforce have 
shewn its effects in the Epistle. 

If only a general circular letter was necessary, 
' Colossians ' might have served for the purpose, 
for though intended for the Colossian Church it 
was also ordered to be read at Laodicea, and if 
there, why not elsewhere also? It probably was 
read elsewhere, but it was not considered by St Paul 
adequate to meet the case, as well it might not be. 
Commentators have observed the measured note of 
thanksgiving which Colossians contains, in contrast 
to the triumphant burst which characterises 
' Ephesians,' among other points of diiiference which 


the attentive reader can mark for himself. But the 
broad difference between Ephesians and Colossians 
is this: Ephesians is kindled by a subjective con- 
sideration of St Paul himself, Colossians is evoked 
by the objective dangers which threatened the 
Colossian Church. Zahn says the readers of Ephesians 
were threatened by the like danger to that of 
Colossae and Laodicea, or more correctly ' threatened 
like them by the danger of being misled into un- 
sound Christianity' But he does not support the 
statement, and we may say that the likeness of the 
danger is not very apparent. The term ' unsound 
Christianity ' is most unfortunately vague. As applied 
to Colossians, it would cover a heresy ; as applied 
to Ephesians, it would cover a schism. And it 
were better to keep these two ideas distinct than to 
combine them in one term. The Colossian heresy 
in fact, which may be seen treated by Lightfoot, 
was very peculiar, and reference to it is entirely 
absent in Ephesians. Moreover, it is the purest 
supposition that some of the readers of Ephesians 
had ' accused St Paul of failing in his obligation to 
them,' and though Zahn makes something^ of the 

Eph vi 21. words 'that ye too may know about my case,' the 
words refer not so much to the occasion of the letter 
itself, which contains no information about St Paul but 
his entreaty for their prayers, as to the arrival of 

Eph vi 19. its bearer Tychicus who, as an Ephesian himself, 

Ac XX4. ^ 

1 SM. i 344. 



would interest the Ephesians more than the members 
of other churches. I am not therefore aware that 
Zahn has urged anything sufficient to modify the 
clear line indicated above for the course of action 
and feeling in which Ephesians originated. 


Does Jiide refer to the written 2 Peter"! 

The conclusion arrived at above (p. 112), that the 
close resemblance between 2 Peter ii and Jude is 
due to the fact that the authors were Silas and 
Jude, who had been companion Prophets, using the 
same plan of teaching and preaching, seems to 
require further consideration at this point, for it 
takes us much further than the result previously- 
reached by the present writer upon independent 
grounds,! -^^x the authors were both Christian 
Prophets. A very different theory has been put 
forward by Zahn ^ which, if held to be sound, would 
explain the phenomena in a way not perhaps 
wholly inconsistent with that here adopted, but 
more purely mechanical, and much more derogatory 
to the ability and character of St Jude. Zahn's 
view turns upon his interpretation of Jude 5, in 
which he discovers a reference to the destruction 

1 C. p. pp. 67, 70, 156. ^Einl. ii pp. 73 ff. 


of Jerusalem in A.D. 70. He therefore places the 
date of the Epistle about 75. Having already put 
2 Peter about 60-63, ^"d earlier than i Peter, he 
then finds that Jude refers to certain events as now 
occurring which in 2 Peter were foretold, and that 
Jude, having 2 Peter before him, has embodied 
most of 2 Peter ii in his own Epistle. He holds 
that 2 Peter was addressed to Jewish Christians of 
Palestine, and that Jude is addressed later to the 
same class of persons. Such a view does not leave 
to St Jude much power of originality, and still less 
does it leave him the character of an inspired 

Now, without covering once more the whole field 
of controversy and either fighting the old battles 
over again as a combatant or seeing them fought 
as an umpire, I venture to submit a few remarks 
upon this theory of the distinguished German theo- 
logian. And first it will be convenient to obtain a 
view of the structure of the Epistle. 

Analysis of Jude. 

We observe that it falls easily into sections, each 
of which is double, for after commencing with 
' These' ... it proceeds with a contrast to ' these ' 
misbelievers and ungodly men in the form of the 
true belief and godliness. This arrangement had 


the sanction of a writer for whom both Jude and 

2 Peter had a profound respect, the Son of Sirach, 

Ecxxxiiiin whose pages they had read as follows: — 'Good 

14 f, 

is set against evil, and life against death, so is the 
godly against the sinner. So look upon all the 
works of the Most High, and there are two and 
two, one against another' In the latter part of the 
Epistle the latter persons on the contrasted side 
are addressed directly as 'You' . . . Thus 19-23 
is one of these sections; 16-18 is another. In the 
earlier verses the contrasted side is given not so 
much under the form of conduct enforced in the 
present time by an imperative, as under that of a 
venerable type drawn from the storied past. Thus 
12-15 is another section; 10- 11 is another; 8-9 is 
another. In these three last sections the types are 
all found in the Pentateuch, or in the Assumption 
of Moses or the Book of Enoch, which seem to 
hold in the author's mind as high a rank as the 
Pentateuch. There is no modern event admitted 
to a place in the antithesis. Having distinguished 
five sections, we push further back and we find in 
verse 5 the beginning of a sixth ^ contrast, begin- 
ning, 'But I wish to remind you^ . . . Now, we 

' I venture to modify in this chapter the remark of Maclear referred 
to in TAe Christian Prophets, p. 148 n. , concerning seven headings in 
the Epistle of Jude, which I now consider to contain six. The number 
of goodness is 7 ; the number of wickedness is 6, which is the base 
of the number of the Beasl, 666. See C. P. p. 176. Jude and 
2 Peter ii contain more about wickedness than about goodness. 


might expect the types which enforce this contrast 
to be of exactly the same nature as the others, 
that is, to be drawn from the Pentateuch or an 
equivalent work. Nor are we disappointed. Sodom 
and Gomorrha, from Genesis ; the angels which 
kept not their proper rule, from the Book of 
Enoch (see C. P. p. 148) ; the Exodus, from the 
O.T. Finally, we discover in verse 4 the original 
' these ' belonging to this first section, only described 
as they should naturally be described when first 
introduced. This section, then, vv. 4-7, is the 
last, or in order of arrangement the first, of the 
six, which form the main body of the Epistle. 
There remain still the address, 1-2 ; the intro- 
duction, 3 ; the conclusion, 24-25. We may now 
arrange the sections and name them thu^ : 

Features of the intruders into the body of the 
faithful Called. 

I 4-7. Impure : types. Exodus and its sequel ; 
fallen angels ; Sodom and Gomorrha. 

II 8-10. Blasphemous: type, Michael and the devil. 

III 11-12. Corrupt: types, Cain, Balaam, Korah. 

IV 13-15. Deceivers: contrast, Enoch's prophecy, 
the Lord cometh to test. 

V 16-18. Arrogant : contrast, the Prophets' and 
Apostles' teaching. 


VI 19-23. Sectarian : contrast, the solid Building 
of the Faith. 

The Revised Version, following Westcott and Hort, 
has given a misleading arrangement of the Epistle 
by commencing a new paragraph at the fifth ' you,' 
and thus disjointing the two portions of the fifth 
section. That these two portions are clearly and 
unmistakeably solid is proved by the fact that the 

jude 16. ' murmurers, complainers, walking after their own 
lusts' are identified by the same feature as the 

Jude 18. ' mockers walking after their own lusts ' foretold by 
the Apostles. The six sections do not deal with six 
several classes of people, but with six fairly distinct 
features of a class of teachers and teaching which 
had begun to steal into the Christian Church and 
corrupt it.. There is much overlapping of the terms 
descriptive of the several features, and part of it is 
intentional. Thus in section II in the first declara- 

jude 8. tion, " Now (not as R. V. ' yet,' for the /xeVroi is 
obviously answered by the ^e in verse 9) in like 
manner also these in their dreamings defile the 
flesh," the defilement of the flesh has been abun- 
dantly treated in the previous verses of section I, 
verses 4 and 7. The words italicised are a link 
between sections I and II. Again, in section III 
the same repetition occurs ; the first declaration, 

Jude 10. " But these men rail at whatever they know not," 
refers to the previous section.' Again, in section V 

Jude 16. the ' respecting persons for the sake of advantage ' 


has been anticipated in 'the error of Balaam for 
reward/ verse 11, and 'their mouth speaketh great?*. 
swelling words' in the 'gainsaying of Kore,' _yerse 11, 
while ' complainers ' suggest Cain, verse 11, when 
he complains, 'My punishment is greater than I Gen iv 13. 
can bear.' Lastly, in section VI the expression ' the 
sectarians' or ' separatists,' (' who make separations,' 
R. v.), refers back also to Korah.^ 

The phraseology of Jude. 

In spite, however, of this pleonasm, or overlapping, 
or repetition, or tautology, the six characteristics 
emerge into clear outline, and so do the accompany- 
ing types or contrasts. Let us review them, beginning 
from the last. 

Section VI — Separatism of an unspiritual kind is 
set against the 'building of yourselves upon your most jude2o. 
holy faith.' If it be asked what building is par- 
ticularly intended, the answer will be found in the 
two passages^-kindred to each other — i Pet ii 4 ff 
and Eph ii 19 ; but there is nothing whatever in Jude 
to show what sort of ' house ' to be ' builded ' is 

Section V — Arrogance of speech, taking the triple 
form oi—{ci) complaining of the appointed lot, (b) 

1 The separation intended is perhaps that between circumcised and 


uttering overswollen words, (c) respecting persons to 
gain advantage, accompanied with lustful conduct, is 
set against the apostolic words of prophecy which 
foretold in the last time mockers, characterised by 
the same lustful conduct, appearing in acts of ungod- 
liness. If it be asked, what is the substance of the 
mockery ? the answer may be seen in 2 Pet iii 4. 

Section IV — Deceivers are described, first, directly 

under two heads : their behaviour at the love-feasts, 

out of which the Holy Communion was developed 

I Cor xi 17- in accordance with St Paul's Rules, and their abuse 


Ezxxxivic. of the pastoral office ; and, secondly, under four 
parabolic images corresponding to the four elements. 
In the air they resemble clouds which promise 
healthy and nourishing rain, but disappear with a 
puff of wind ; on the earth they are as barren as 
in late autumn, after the fall of the leaf, but dead 
in reality as well as in appearance, and therefore 
uprooted as useless ; on the sea they are as empty as 
wild waves which do but break in foam and sand and 
mud, to end in their own disgrace ; in the realm of 
fire they are like astonishing comets, which quickly 
vanish in eternal darkness. Against the deceivers is 
set the prophecy of ' Enoch,i the seventh from Adam,' 
and therefore remarkable as holding the sabbatical 
number, who foretells the sure judgment of the 
Lord and the testing of the ungodly and their works. 

' The title itself is from Enoch ix S : ' the seventh from Adam, the 
first man whom the Lord of spirits created. ' 


Section III — Corruption of hirelings is the fulfil- 
ment of three types : in its disregard of life it crowns 
the murderous work of Cain ; in its avarice it runs 
riotously after the error of Balaam ; in its rebellion 
it perishes as surely as Korah. 

Section II — Blasphemy, besides tending to the 
defilement of the flesh, attacks both earthly sovereignty 
and heavenly glories, but over against it stands the 
type of Michael, who was content to invoke the 
Lord's rebuke and to wait for its coming. We note 
that the blasphemy in question is connected with 
false prophecy. The ' dreaming ' is expressed by the 
very same word which is used by Joel and applied to joei ii 28. 
the dreaming of the Elders, and nowhere is this word 
found in N.T. except where Joel's prophecy is quoted. Actsii 17. 
It is certain that the false teachers who are the 
object of Jude's warning were false Prophets who, in 
spite of the stern denunciation of dreams in Ecclus. 
xxxiv, relied upon their dreams as a pretended 
means of revelation, and were glad to shelter their 
claims under the prophecy of Joel. They pretended 
to be Prophets, but were not ; they cited their dreams 
in support of their pretence, because dreams were 
sometimes cited by Christian Prophets. But the 
group of passages in N.T. in which dreams are 
highly valued is an isolated one, and, apart from the 
famous passage in Joel, the rarity of dreams in 
N.T. in contrast with the O.T. is more striking than 
their presence. 


The scope of Jude and ZaHn's date for it. 

We now come to Section I. The counter-types 
are — {a) Sodom and Gomorrha, of outrageous lust ; 
{b) the angels who fell by unnatural indulgence; (c) 
the destruction of the unbelieving Israelites. I 
cannot agree with Zahn here in thinking that any 
event so modern as the fall of Jerusalem of A.D. 70 
would be in 75 A.D. can possibly be mentioned as a 
type. The whole of the epistle is in regard to its 
types archaic ; it seeks them in the ancient past. It 
is quite true that the two concluding warnings (17-18 
and 20-23), which are not types, are, as they must be, 
impressed with a modern stamp ; they deal with the 
present or the immediate past : but here, in 4-7, we 
have a type of the same antiquity as Enoch or Moses, 
and any more recent type would be out of place. 
Jude 5. The first part of («) of course refers to the exodus 
directly and in no allegorical sense : ' The Lord 
brought a people out of Egypt' It has been 
observed that there is no definite article before 
' people.' The reason is that He did not bring the 
true people out of Egypt, but an idolatrous people 
which perished in the wilderness, except Joshua and 
Caleb. ' The people ' was the people of the next 
generation, which passed over into the land of 
Canaan. But what are the two destructions referred 
to ? Assuming that the reading of Westcott and 
Hort is correct (as R.V.), we shall doubtless admit 


that the first destruction was of those who perished 
in the wilderness, and the only question is whether 
we must give what in Jude's time would be a 
modern meaning to ' the second time ' {to Sevrepov). 
Now Zahn's interpretation of the whole epistle rests 
upon these words, and he holds that there have 
been two destructions of ' them that believed not,' 
one soon after the exodus, and the other in 70 A D. 
Nothing in the interval is to count as a destruction, 
neither what happened in the time of David, nor in 
that of Hoshea, nor in that of Zedekiah, nor in that 
of Antiochus. The most momentous and over- 
whelming catastrophe of the Jews as a people — we 
are to suppose — is not referred to in 75 A.D. except 
under the remote and obscure expression ' the 
second time.' Jude, according to Zahn, was writing 
in Palestine, but he writes unmoved by this ' shaking 
of the earth and of the heaven,' and can bestow no 
more than a fragment of a line to the notice of this up- 
heaval, in which 1,100,000 Jews are said by Josephus^ 

' The figure is generally considered to be an exaggeration, like many 
others on the part of Josephus. Merivale considers that it is by no 
means an excessive estimate that 90,000 Jews were made captives in 
the course of the whole war. Josephus says that his statement of 
1,100,000 will not appear extravagant when we remember that the 
multitudes which flocked to Jerusalem for the passover were shut up in 
the city, and that the priests, when interrogated by Cestius about the 
number of their people, had calculated the number of the Paschal 
Lambs in a given year at 256,500 and the number of communicants at 
2,700,000. See Merivale, Hist. R. E., vol. vi., p. 599. We have to 
consider what a contemporary would estimate in this case of Jude 
rather than the actual fact. 


to have perished and the Temple and the Holy City- 
was left a heap of stones. One would think that there 
was no fulfilment of prophecy in particular connected 
with the overthrow. Prophecy, with its ancient types 
of Cain, Balaam, and Korah, went imperturbably on, 
though the golden candlestick was removed and the 
golden table disappeared. It hardly noticed that 
Jerusalem was not there. The incident was equivalent 
to about half a line in the epistle of Jude ! 

But the case is otherwise if we are not obliged to 
strain our sight to this microscopic reference to an 
overwhelming fact. Let it be supposed that Jude is 
not later than 70, and all is simple enough. The 
meaning of verse 5 is ' I wish to remind you, though 
you know everything (necessary to salvation) once 
for all (since you were baptised), that the Lord 
having brought a people safely through out of the 
land of Egypt (and having once destroyed in the Red 
Sea the Egyptians then) afterwards destroyed in the 
wilderness them of Israel who believed not.' There 
is no trace of a reference to the event of 70 A.D. in 
the Epistle of Jude. Hence we infer that the Epistle 
was written before 70. 

We now come to the consideration of verse 4, where 

the intruders who 

" for their bellies' sake, 
Creep, and intrude, and climb into the fold " 

are first mentioned, as ' they who were of old set 
forth unto this condemnation, ungodly men ' (R.V.). 



The only natural meaning of -Kpoyeypa^^kvoi is that 
they were ' set forth in writing ' ; whether we lay 
stress on the preposition as meaning ' beforehand ' or 
not, it is plain that they were set forth by some kind 
of Prophet, but it is also plain that the word must 
imply a written statement. It would be safer to 
translate /c/w'/xa ' sentence ' than ' condemnation ' 
which would be KaraKpi/xa, but the verse here is 
the same owing to the context. ' Unto this sentence, 
ungodly ..." is surely plain enough, although, as 
Alford remarks, we might have disputed which 
passage of O.T. was specially intended, had we not 
been provided with the citation from the Book of 
Enoch in verse 14,1 which strikes on the note of 
ungodliness no less than four times. The expression 
in verse 4 would have been put by a Greek scholar, 
which Jude was not, in the form eh to Kpifia tSu/ Acxxiv^s. 
a<re^wv . . ' to the sentence of the ungodly.' 

The approximate date of Jude. 

It thus appears that the Epistle is directed against 
ungodly men, whose characteristic features are 

'This verse is wrongly translated in R.V. The right translation is : 
' But Enoch, the seventh from Adam, prophesied in these words also, 
saying, . . .' The naX to&tois cannot possibly be otherwise taken. 
The atsa points back to the previous reference to the Book of Enoch in 
Jude 5, the bearing of which has been given, together with the original, 
in TAe Christian Prophets, p. 148. Enoch Ixxxvi I. 


242 57- LUKE AND ST J,UDE 

described at some length, and whose end has been 
foretold by written prophecy supposed to be ancient, 
as well as by ancient prophecy itself. It is plain that 
its date is earlier than 70 a.d., nor does it seem that 
any Epistle except the ' Hebrews ' and i John is 
later than that epoch. We may therefore agree with 
Dr. Sandayi that Jude ' must be placed late in the 
Apostolic age,' understanding the Apostolic age to 
mean the age in which the 12 Apostles and St Paul 
had lived, and no longer.^ He further says that in 
Jude "faith has got the concrete sense of a 'body of 
belief — not necessarily a large or complete body, 
but as we should say ' the essentials of Christianity.' 
As the particular point against which the saints are 
to contend is the denial of Christ, so the faith for 
which they are to contend would be the (full) con- 
fession of Christ (Jude 3 f , 20)." All remarks of Dr. 
Sanday deserve the greatest respect and care and 
consideration, and it is never easy to differ from 
them. But this remark is obviously capable of a 
variety of meanings, according as one enlarges or 
narrows the meaning of the ' essentials of Chris- 
tianity.' It may be, however, enough to say that 
whatever these were in the time of Jude they were 
required at baptism of every candidate, for baptism 

^ Comm. on Romans, p. xxxii. 

^The passage in Clement Alex. Strom, vii. 17 maybe quoted with 
advantage : ' The teaching of His Apostles concludes with the public 
ministry of Paul under Nero.' See The Christian Prophets, p. 247. 


as it was then practised and the conditions of it as 
then required are what we have to consider. There 
caiinot be a doubt that ' tjie essentials,' ' the body of 
belief,' were 'handed on' — to use the word in Jude 3 
— by tradition to the baptised, and confession was Rom x 9. 
then made by them accordingly. The Apostles' 
Creed in its present form did not exist, but 'the 
essentials ' of it did, and were required. There is no 
other reference in verse 3 to any ' body of teaching ' ; 
there is no reference to anything like a council or 
conciliar dogmas ; there is no reference to an epoch 
which fixed the contents of 'the faith.' Whatever 
baptismal form was in use then is referred to, and 
baptism is declared to be an event ' once for all ' in 
contradistinction to John's baptism.^ The form used 
then may have been our own form, but there is little Mtxxviiiig. 
doubt that Matthew's Gospel was not then composed. 
It may have been one of the simpler forms given us 
in the Acts: "I believe in the name of the Lord Ac xvi 31. 

xix 5, ii 38, 

Jesus," or "I believe in the name of Jesus Christ.' "48. 
In that burning and solemn statement of St Paul in 
Rom X 9 we have everything which 'the essentials 
of Christianity ' can possibly convey. " If thou shalt 
confess the word in thy mouth that ' Jesus is Lord,' 
and believe in thy heart that God raised Him from 
the dead, thou shalt be saved." And assuredly this 

1 See T/ie Christian Prophets, p. 197, where it is contended that 
John's baptism was not ' once for all,' but was as frequent as 



' faith ' was worth contending for, and the Christians 
of those days did contend for it. I fail to see that 
the expression compels us to admit any later date 
than, for instance, any of St Paul's references to 
baptism, in his Epistles of 53-63 A.D. It leaves us 
where we were. 

We now return to Zahn's statement that Jude 
contains a clear and definite quotation from 2 Peter, 
which he considers was written some 10-15 years 
earlier. The passages are Jude 18 and 2 Pet iii 3. 
It may be admitted at once that the words are 
quite close enough for the one passage to be a 
quotation of the other. But we must prefix the 
context : 

_/ude 17. 

But ye, beloved, remember ye 
the words which have been 
spoken before by the Apostles 
of our Lord Jesus Messiah ; 
that they used to tell you ' In 
the last time there shall be 
mockers walking after their 
own lusts of ungodlinesses'. 

2 Pe/ iii I . 

. . to remember the words 
which have been spoken be- 
fore by the holy Prophets, 
and the commandment of 
your Apostles of the Lord 
and Saviour ; knowing ' this 
first, that there shall come in 
the last days mockers ^ with 
mockery, walking after their 
own lusts, and saying . . 

' The word is -^iviiiaKovm, coming to know, learning by experience, 
and it is not the same as elSdras in Jude 5, which implies intuitive 
knowledge, subsisting in a much deeper layer of the mind, so to speak, 
than the experience of the moment. 

^ Cf Enoch cviii 6. ' Here are cast the spirits of sinners and blas- 
phemers and those who work wickedness and those who pervert 
everything that God does through the mouth of the Prophets — (even) 
the things that shall be.' 


What Strikes us first is that if Jude refers back 
to 2 Peter and quotes it, 2 Peter seems equally 
to refer back to some other earlier authorities and 
quote them. Both Jude and 2 Peter speak of the 
earlier authorities in the plural. If Jude is merely 
referring to 2 Peter, it is strange that he should use 
the plural. Zahn says that there is nothing strange 
because Jude recognises that other Apostles besides 
2 Peter had probably said the same. This appeal, 
however, to a vague use of the plural, when at 
the same time a definite singular is required in 
order to substantiate the claim of a definite quota- 
tion, is not at all convincing. The natural expression 
for Jude would have been far more effective, and 
it would have been put in the singular number. 
But it is a more fatal objection still against Zahn, 
that there is not a trace in Jude of his original 
authority having written his prophecy. Thrice does 
Jude say that the prophecy was oral : the words 
(or utterances, prifxaTwv), spoken before, used to say. 
Could anything be more conclusive to show that 
there was no written letter quoted? Just as the 
murmurers indulge in great sounding words so the 
Apostles, in contrast to them, used to warn by the 
spoken word. The absence of writing in Jude 17 
is as abundantly clear as the presence of writing 
is in Jude 4. Jude does not quote 2 Peter. 

Both Jude and 2 Peter refer to the same past 
oral teaching. At the same time it is worth while 


to enquire more particularly what is the original 
authbrity for the ' mockers ' of 2 Pet iii 3. And 
the answer is partly to be found in a chapter of 

zsch xii 3, O.T. which has probably influenced the history of 
the world as much as any in the whole Bible, for 
it contains the words, which, however, the LXX does 
not, ' They shall look on me whom they have 
pierced.' ^ Next, along with this passage of Zech 
xii it is evident that Peter has combined a text of 
solemn reflection which concludes the history of the 
Chronicles, and which is generally taken by critics 
to belong to about 300 B.C. (not earlier than 332, 

2Chx.xxvi Driver). "And the Lord God of their fathers 
sent (e^aTrecrretXev) to them by his messengers, rising 
up betimes and sending apostles (airoerTeWcov) ; 
because he had compassion on his people, and 
on his dwelling place: But they mockbd the 
messengers of God, and despised his words, and 
scoffed at (efXTrai^ovTei) his prophets, until the wrath 
of the Lord arose against his people, till there was 
no remedy." The passage is of course a summaiy 
of the history, but is was well known that the 
history of the Prophets' illtreatment and suffering hid 
repeated and would repeat itself from time to time. 

Ecciusxviii Thirdly, the origin of the latter part of 2 Pet 
iii 3 is Ecclus v 2, ' Follow not after thy soul and thy 
strength to walk in the lusts of thy heart, and say 
not, Who shall control me 1 For the Lord will 

^ Christian Prophets, p. 105. 

30, V 2. 



surely punish thee.' The quotation is not very- 
clear, and yet it seems to be certain that this is 
its origin, for almost immediately afterwards in 2 
Peter iii 9 we have the immediate context of Ecclus 
V 4, ' Say not I have sinned and what harm happened 
unto me ? for the Lord is long-suffering.' Again 
we have Ecclus v 7 quoted loosely in 2 Pet iii 10, 
' For suddenly shall the wrath of the Lord come 
forth . . .' 

Apostles and Prophets. 

But this comparison leads us back to 2 Peter 
iii, and first of all to the terms in which he in- 
troduces the foretelling of the mockers. He speaks, 
only less definitely than Jude, of the utterances that 
have been spoken beforehand by the' Prophets and 
the Apostles. Had he meant written beforehand 
he might have used just as easily the term irpoye- 
ypa/uLfjLevwv, 'that have been written before,' for he 
is a more accomplished writer of Greek than Jude 
is. There are, indeed, in 2 Peter slight irregularities 
in syntax, which, however, are not solecisins, but 
the same kinds of false sequence that we find again 
and again in Thucydides.^ Jude, on the other hand, 

^ The very remarkable sequence in 2 Pet i 17 has been quoted in TAe 
Christian Prophets, p. 162, as proving the author to be alsO the author 
of the Acts. I still think so, even if it stood without the 14 other 
instances given. Another nominative in suspense is 2 Pet iii 3 
yivda-Koi'Tcs which should be in the accusative. 


is correct, but extremely compressed : the page is 
crowded with images, each of which might form 
the text of a picture or discourse or even a parable : 
he is above all suggestive, of course within his own 
limits and range of thought. The epistle is a col- 
lection of headings. But 2 Peter has at any rate 
a beginning, a middle, and an end : nor can I at 
all admit the truth of Zahn's remark ^ concerning 
its ' obscure and unwieldy ' style. The whole ob- 
scurity — such as it is — disappears when it is under- 
stood that he is a Christian Prophet, like Jude, 
speaking sometimes of Christian Prophecy as a living 
gift in the Church. He plainly says that the Apostles 
and Prophets spoke: speaking was their first duty. 
We have already seen why the Prophets are so 
frequently classed with the Apostles. The Prophets 
were sometimes sent upon circuits or Missionary 
Journeys, and when so sent forth they became 
Apostles. After going on Circuit frequently they 
would naturally become known as Apostles, and 
would take precedence of Prophets who had not 
been so sent forth. 

It follows from what has been said that the 
meaning of 2 Peter iii 2 is that his readers at Rome 
had received the preaching of Christian Prophets, 
and the Saviour's commandment had been made 
known unto them by Apostles sent expressly to 
them — 'your Apostles.' The Prophets did not 

^ Einl. ii p. 91. 


belong to these Roman readers in particular; for 
instance, St Luke had preached to them ; but ' their 
Apostles ' included both St Paul and St Peter himself. 
On the other hand when Jude bids his readers 
' remember the words spoken before by the Apostles jude 17. 
of Jesus ' he may perhaps include some who did not 
belong to the Twelve. There is no reason why Jude 
should not include under the term 'the Apostles 
of Jesus ' his own previous words spoken as an 
Apostle to his present readers. St Jude's im- 
mediate readers were not — we may safely say — the 
same as the immediate readers of 2 Peter, but the 
substance of his teaching is very similar, and the way 
in which he introduces it is very similar also. 

7";^!? intention te write a larger work — a Gospel. 

For example, he comes before them as a writer 
engaged upon some larger work, but pressed by an 
emergency to indite the present urgent warning 
before the magnum opus can appear. ' Beloved, 
while I am giving' (the R.V. perhaps means to 
assume an epistolary past in English, which however 
natural in Latin or Greek is unnatural in our idiom), 
' all diligence to write unto you ' (the present ypoKptiv jude 3 
' to be a writer ' is here sharply contrasted with the 
aorist ypdyfrai 'to write a particular letter' in the 
same verse), 'of our common salvation, I am' ('was' 


R.V.) "constrained to write unto you exhorting ybu 
to contend.' . . . Now a very similar feature strikes 
our attention in 2 Peter i 12-16, where St Luke 
writes for St Peter thus : ' I shall be ready always to 
rernind you ' (present tense) ' of these things . . . and 
I think it right, so long as I am in this tabernacle} 
to stir you up by putting you in remembrance ; 
knowing that the putting off of my tabernacle 
Cometh swiftly, even as our Lord Jesus Christ 
signified unto me ; but I will give diligence that ye 
be able, at every time also, after my decease td call 
these things to remembrance.' Now, what can be 
the meaning of these words except that Peter will 
be near them during the remainder of his life, which 
may end by violence any time, to remind them and 
to stir them up, but also that he plans the production 
of some written work, by which they can remind 
themselves after his death .' This is the only possible 
meaning, as Zahn has shown.^ But Zahn goes on to 

^'Tabernacle' is suggested by Enoch xci 13, which describes the ■ 
eighth week, of Righteousness, already quoted p. 140. ... ' And at 
its close they will acquire houses through their righteousness, and the 
House of the Great King will be builded in glory for evermore.' St 
Peter then evidently dates his epistle, prophetically speaking, in the 
dose of the eighth week. But it is not quite clear whether in 2 Pet i there 
is a contrast intended between ' this tabernacle ' and ' that house ' or 
whether he identifies the two. 

"^ Einl. ii p. 47. It may be worth while to observe that Ignatius, 
Eph 20 (quoted in The Christian Prophets, p. 12) declares a Similar 
intention of writing a second treatise to them dealing with ' the passion 
and resurrection, especially if the Lord should reveal aught unto me.' 
Such a treatise has never been heard of. 



say that the words point to " a doctrinal writing, like 
2 Peter itself, and not to a history. Even if 2 Peter 
were written about 170 A.D., it would be inadmissible 
to think of a Gospel of Mark, for the story that Peter 
commissioned Mark to write his Gospel did not 
originate till much later; and even after the forma- 
tion of this opinion, such an intention could not be 
ascribed to Peter in words which only permit us to 
think of a religious doctrinal writing. There is no 
writing which could make such a claim . . . and so 
far as we know there never has been." Now in this 
opinion I cannot follow Zahn. The very next words 
in 2 Peter throw a clear light upon the character of 
the work intended to be written. " For we did not 
follow cunningly devised fables when we made 
known unto you the historical facts of the power and 
presence of our Lord Jesus Messiah." The meaning 
of the first word /or is plain enough. 'We have 
given you the historical fact of the transfiguration, 
with other facts, which as fulfilments of prophecy you 
are to call to mind and think over; but we have not 
given you enough, and there are more to be given 
you, if God will, and they are equally historical facts, 
and not mythical fables.' It seems clear, therefore, 
that the greater work, the kt^/xu e? ael as Thucydides 
would have called it — and the e/cao-Tore here is almost 
identical with the meaning of aei in that famous 
phrase — was intended to be a history, and not an 
epistle. I have no doubt that the intention here 


expressed was fulfilled in the writing of St Luke's 
gospel — not St Mark's — by the very amanuensis ^ 
who first wrote and composed these words of 2 Peter. 

Closer inquiry into the date of Jude. 

It would seem then that the intention of writing a 
larger and more comprehensive work, containing the 
facts of the Gospel history, was present to the minds 
of both the Prophets, Jude and Silas-Luke, and 
naturally it would be forced upon them in the 
course of their joint ministrations in Judaea. They 
continued to cherish it for years before it was put 
into effect. But it seems on every ground to be 
probable that Luke was engaged in collecting 
materials for it during the time that St Paul was 
imprisoned at Csesarea. He would then be able to 
converse with the dwellers of Northern Palestine 
and Syro-Phoenicia, for it is probable that he never 
left St Paul for a very long absence, and he would 
maintain his headquarters at Caesarea. But other 
parts of the country would also be well within his 
range. Such visits would enable him to supply many 
of those details which are found in Lk only and 
which belong less to the neighbourhood of the Sea 
of Galilee and to Jerusalem. Such are the incidents ^ 

' Christian Prophets, p. 162.* 

^ Sanday in Book by Book, N. T. p. 64. 


relating to the Samaritan village and the Samaritan Lkixsifr. 

Lk xvii 1 1 ff. 

leper ; even the parables of the Good Samaritan, and lic x 30 tr. 
of the Unrighteous Steward, and other passages in 
Lk xiii and the next three chapters, especially infor- 
mation connected with the Herods and their Court at 
Csesarea. However this may be, the joint preaching 
of Jude and Luke, which had already taken place 
about the year 50 A.D. or before, might easily have 
been renewed during these two years of captivity 
without Luke having left St Paul for any length of 
time. This is the view which appears to me to suit 
the phenomena better than any other. " The two 
Apostles worked upon a common plan, and the 
syllabus or substance of their teaching, in regard to 
the one most unpleasant development of the gospel 
at this time, is embodied in the twin passages 'Jude' 
and 2 Peter ii. At the same time this is not the 
only date at which the renewal of the companionship 
of Jude and Silas was possible. It may have taken 
place when Silas was fresh from Corinth at the end 
of St. Paul's 'second' missionary journey (see p. 91 
above), after Acts xviii 22. 

Closer parallelism 0/2 Peter and Jude. 

But before proceeding further we must deal with 
two questions which naturally arise at this point of 
the enquiry. First : Do the ungodly of 2 Peter 
show the same general features as those of Jude? 


Secondly, Do the ungodly of Jude show a similar 
stage of development to that which we find in any 
other place, for instance, in the Church of Corinth 
as described in i Corinthians? 

I. Following the orderof the description given in Jude 
and the enumeration as given above Tp. 233), we search 
in 2 Peter and we find the following correspondences: 

Introductions tally closely in the three points : (i) the 
sinners enter by the side ; (2) they begin by denial ; 
{3) they will be punished. 

I. Impure : 2 Pet ii 2 ' lascivious doings.' R.V., but 

the Greek word is the same as that of Jude 4 
(singular). Also 2 Pet ii 18 referred to below. 

II. Blasphemous: 2 Pet ii 2 'by reason of whom 

the way of truth shall be blasphemed,' Jude 
8 ' they blaspheme glories.' Also 2 Pet ii 1 1 
referred to below. 

III. Corrupt : 2 Pet ii 3 ' in covetousness shall thpy 
with feigned words make merchandise of you.' 
The covetousness is essentially that ' of Balaam 
for reward ' in Jude 12; the ' feigned words ' are 
not unlike 'the gainsaying of Korah' in tlie 
same verse. The construction of ifXTropeva-ovTai 
bears the stamp of Luke.^ 

After stamping these first three characteristics of the 
ungodly class in ii 2, 3, 2 Peter enlarges on their 
punishment, which he illustrates by that of the rebel 
angels, that of the deluge, that of Sodom and 

'See TAe Christian Prophets, p. 163. 


Gomorrha, from which Lot was rescued. Jude 
mentions the first and the last of these three types, 
but not the deluge. But what is particularly note- 
worthy is that 2 Peter enlarges on the subject of Lot. 
Now we have seen that on a critical occasion in his 
travels the type of Sodom and Lot was very much 
borne in upon his mind (see p. 58 above), and it is 
probable that 2 Peter ii 7-9 represents the experience 
of many a day in the Apostle Luke's own life in 
heathen cities. 

In 2 Pet ii 10-12 he reviews the same characteristics 
again, in the order I., II. with the type of Michael 
as given in Jude, yet without mentioning the name, 
III. in almost the words of Jude 11. 

We now continue with 

IV. Deceivers: 2 Pet ii 13-17 in mixing in the 
Love- Feasts, as in Jude 12. Zahn is undoubt- 
edly right in maintaining ayairaii in 2 Pet ii 13 
as well as in Jude 12. The comparison with 
' spots ' employs almost the same word as in 
Jude. The graphic description in 2 Pet ii 14 
of the eyes and the heart of the ungodl)' is not 
in Jude, and it leads to a brief digression upon 
Balaam (15, 16). This is followed by a double 
type from nature (17) corresponding to the 
quadruple type of Jude. 

V. Arrogant: 2 Pet ii 18 in point of great swelling 

words, which, as in Jude 16, are combined with 
lustful conduct. 


VI. Sectarian : 2 Pet ii 19 ' promising -them free- 
dom, when they are themselves slaves of 
corruption, which is shown to be pollution 
by carnal indulgence in the expressions which 
follow (19-22). It is a safe inference that the 
same feature is expressed in Jude 19, ' sensual, 
not having the spirit ' as is expressed in ' the 
pollution of the world,' ' entangled,' ' wallowing 
in the mire ' of 2 Pet ii 20-22. And we may 
go further and say that the 'promise of 
freedom' 2 Pet ii 19 is tantamount to 'separa- 
tist,' Jude 19. Any doubt that may arise on 
this identity is dispelled by the consideration 
of one particular text which brings out the 

! Cor iii 17. connexion between ' freedom ' and ' the spirit.' 

' Now where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is 
freedom ' (that is, true freedom, not the pro- 
mised freedom of the licentious by whom 
Christ is made a reason for sin, and who 

Rom vi 1. advocate ' continuance in sin that grace may 

abound.') 2 Pet ii enlarges in 20-22 upon the 
slavery of relapse into sin, and concludes with 

Eccius xxxiv a thought borrowed from Ecclesiasticus. ' He 

that washeth himself after the touching of a 
dead body, if he touch it again, what availeth 
his washing .■' So is it with a man that fasteth 
for his sins, and goeth again, and doeth the 
same : who will hear his prayer ? or what doth 
his humbling profit him } ' 



Thus the parallelism between 2 Peter ii and Jude 
is complete. It is true that 2 Pet ii begins the 
passage (1-3) with a future tense, four times repeated. 
But in the remaining nineteen verses there are pre- 
sents and aorists and perfects, while the only future 
which occurs refers to the punishment in store for the 
sinners. When, therefore, Zahn says that this is all a 
prophecy about certain false teachers of the then 
future, which was fulfilled according to Jude in the 
then present, which was some twelve years later than 
the prophecy of 2 Pet ii, he is making too much of 
the initial future tenses of 2 Pet ii 1-3. A present 
evil tendency in society is actually, for some time to 
come at least, a future tendency, and this is true 
even of ' the last times ' so long as the actual last day 2 Pet iii 3. 
is delayed. Though the authors and promoters of it 
will be punished, still the evil will continue, and will 
not be instantaneously stopped unless the world is 
stopped — an event which was then expected shortly. 
Consequently there is veryjittle difference between 
the said future tenses of 2 Pet ii 1-3 and 
the present tenses of Jude. If the graphic de- 
scription in 2 Pet ii 1 3 f has been borrowed partly 
from Ecclesiasticus and Proverbs, it is also bor- 
rowed from life ; and if such wickedness existed in 
the writer's day it might equally well be described 
in the present tense along with Jude and the greater 
part of 2 Pet ii, as in the future tense along with 
2 Pet ii 1-3. It will not be denied that the torturing 2 Pct iii 16. 


of passages in St Paul's letters is mentioned in 
2 Peter, a present and not a future characteristic. 
But there is every reason to suppose that the torturers 
were the same aforesaid ungodly, since the ' un- 
learned ' corresponds to the ' ignorance' of 2 Pet ii 12, 
the ' unstable ' corresponds to the victims of the 
deceivers in 2 Pet ii 14, ' the error of the (wicked 
R.V.) lawless ' to the ' lawless ' of 2 Pet ii 7. More- 
over, the writer is an enthusiastic Prophet and 
launches out into the future all the more readily 
because it is habitual with the Prophets so to do. 

The connection between St Peter and 2 Peter ii. 

If it should further be asked, why, if the syllabus 
be essentially that of Luke and Jude, it should be put 
forth under the name of Peter, the answer appears to 
be simple enough. The acceptance of it by Peter 
had been ensured already. Peter remained long in 
Palestine : he might even have stayed there till about 
the year 60. This circle of ideas would be similar to 
that of Jude, and whatever line of teaching com- 
mended itself to the one would be welcome to the 
other. The syllabus bears the strongest marks of 
prophetic revision. The types and their fulfilments 
had been submitted to Prophets in Session and been 
accepted by them. The phraseology shows just such 
independence of treatment as would be found if the 


types and their fulfilments were fixed by authority of 
the Prophets in Session, and only the language in 
which they were to be clothed had been left to the 
individual writer or preacher. The Epistle of Jude 
may have remained in the keeping of some church of 
Palestine ; the syllabus was remembered by St Peter 
and St Luke, to be treated in their own way, which 
was, as it eventually proved, St Luke's way, when the 
time came to address another church, the Roman, on 
the same subject of vital importance. 

Relation 0/2 Peter to the Corinthian Church. Christian 
faith in collision with licentiousness. 

IL We now come to the second question, whether 
the ungodly of Jude show a similar stage of develop- 
ment to that which we find in the Corinthian Church. 
We must bear in mind that the tendency to license 
was, philosophically speaking, not a matter of mere 
chance which happened to occur just then at Corinth. 
It was not simply a local trouble or due to local 
circumstance.s. It is usual, no doubt, for commen- 
tators to enlarge upon the abnormal sensuality of 
Corinth, and it may be granted that the conditions 
of such a thriving and wealthy commercial city 
were conducive to the greatest possible licentious- 
ness. But the same might be said of Ephesus, 
Thessalonica, Antioch, and many more places. This 


is not enough. We must recognise the fact that 
any disturbance of the old Jewish lines of belief 
and conduct, especially when they were changed for 
the purpose of admitting the heathen proselytes to 
Ac xiv 27. the Church, and when the ' door of faith ' was opened 
alongside of the most venerable door of circum- 
cision, must inevitably result in perversion of the 
•true teaching, and in a disposition to torture it in 
order to allow loose conduct to combine with a 
profession of the faith. No sooner is a new aspira- 
tion on the wing than a new effort to reach it is 
required, and new muscles are put in movement 
which cause a stiffness and a difficulty which in 
their turn provoke attempts at conciliation and 
easement. This flight is too high for the soul 
which has not counted the cost and the fatigue. 
It is too sustained for the soul which has under- 
rated the clinging power and deadly weight of old 
associations. The real height is greater than the 
apparent, and has baffled and disappointed the soul 
that was never made for such a daring attempt. 
All the samples of failure comprised in the Parable 
of the Sower would now begin to find their illustra- 
tion in practice. And yet the attempt at conciliation 
of two incompatible things, the fellowship of Christ 
and indulgence in sensual lust, would continue to 
be made, and the Gospel must pass through that 
phase of its existence in which it is well-nigh 
choked with the riches and pleasures of this life. 


St Luke having personally seen this development 
at Corinth had realised its dangerous poison in an 
acute form,i but he also saw that it must needs 
before long assail all other parts of the Church. 

We may for convenience examine the condition 
of the Corinthian Church under the same heads as 

I. Impure. Nothing can be stronger than St Paul's iCorvi. 
words on this head : ' Such fornication as is not 

even among the Gentiles.' But if this does not 
prove that the last stage of development had been 
reached at Corinth, we may read further in the 
indictment of the heathen vices which he had 
written from Corinth to Rome, and which he must Rom i 24 ff. 
have based on what he saw around him at Corinth 
and elsewhere. There was quite enough to justify 
the type of Sodom and Gomorrha. 

II. Blasphemous. St Paul was the object of extreme i corxso. 
evil-speaking at Corinth, for he says : ' If I by 
grace partake, why am I blasphemed for that for 
which I give thanks .? ' Again : ' Being reviled we 
(continue to) bless; being persecuted ' (not by Rome, . 

of course — far from it), ' we endure ; being defamed, j cor iv 12. 
we exhort ; we are made as the filth of the world, 
the offscouring of all things, even until now.' 

^Zahn says (Einl. ii loi) ; 'We find all elements of the prophetic 
picture of the false teachers in 2 Peter already present in i Cor, but not 
yet at the same stage of development.' I think, however, that this 
same stage has been fully reached at Corinth. 


III. Corrupt. The quality is illustrated under three 
headings : {A) indifference to life, physical or 
spiritual, when anger is allowed free scope, of 
which Cain is the type. St Paul has implied very 
clearly that there were in the Corinthian Church 
the forms of sin which he feared he should find 
when he came to visit them again. ' I fear, lest 

jCorxiiso. by any means when I come, . . . there should be 
strife, jealousy, wraths' (these three are represented 
by the way of Cain) ; ' factions ' (that is the follow- 
ing of hireling or hiring leaders, epiOiai), ' back- 
bitings, whisperings,' (these three are typified by 
the error of Balaam) ; ' swellings, disorders ' (these 

2Corxi3. two answer to the gainsaying of Kore). Elsewhere 
he refers to {B) the second aspect of corruption, 
impure motive, thus : ' Lest your minds be cor- 
rupted from the simplicity and the purity that is 
toward Christ,' and in the verses immediately follow- 
ing he proceeds to lay stress on the fact that, so 
far from working for reward himself, he was never 

2 Cor xi 9. 'a burden on any man.' He had previously 

3 coi ii 17. contrasted himself with ' the many ' who ' make 
merchandise'^ of the word of God, but as of 
sincerity . . speak we in Christ.' We compare 

2Coriv2. also the reference to those 'who handle the word 

^The list appears in an altered and enlarged form in Gal v 19, 'the 
Ap ii 14. works of the flesh,' of which all the terms could be justified by the state- 
ments scattered in i and 2 Cor concerning the Corinthian Church, 
except perhaps ' witchcraft,' which, however, is one side of Balaamism. 


of God deceitfully.' And thus we have sufficient 
proof that Balaamism ' for reward ' was rife at 
Corinth. (C) The third type of ' the gainsaying of 
Kore' is shown to be fulfilled in gainsaying of St 
Paul's authority very frequently throughout i Cor 
and 2 Cor, though not indeed under the name of 
Korah. St Paul says : ' If he that cometh preacheth = Cor xi 4. 
another Jesus, whom we did not preach . . . .' ' Such ^ Cor xi i^ 
men are false Apostles, deceitful workers, fashioning 
themselves into Apostles of Christ' 'If any man^Corxy. 
trusteth in himself that he is Christ's,' this last 
resembles Korah's saying : ' All the congregation Num xvi 3. 
are holy.' 

IV. Deceivers. The presence of these at Corinth 
has been just mentioned above, in a general sense. 
But in the special sense Jude and 2 Peter refer to 
their presence at the love-feasts which were now in 
process of being connected, by St Paul's regulation, 
with the Lord's Supper more closely than before. 
This is exactly where the special form of deception 
comes in at Corinth. 'First of all, when ye come iCorxii/fr. 
together in the church, I hear that divisions exist 
among you ; and I partly believe it. For there 
must be also heresies among you, that they which 
are approved {i.e. pass the test which sifts the true 
from the deceivers) may be made manifest among 
you.' There were, therefore, false teachers on this jude 12. 
subject also, as well as false learners. And these, 
who came for eating and drinking only — one being 


hungry and another drunken, ' ate and drank judge- 
ment unto themselves.' 'Their coming together' 
was not to be ' unto judgement' 

V. Arrogant. The murmuring of some of the 
Corinthians is specially noticed by St. Paul when 

iCorxio. he says: 'Neither murmur ye, as some of them 
also murmured ; and were destroyed by the 
destroyer.' The whole of that chapter in its first 
part is devoted to the teaching of the types of the 

I Cor X 6. Exodus : ' Now these things were done as types,' 
or, ' were made to be types, of us.' The R.V. here 
goes quite away from the mark when it translates : 
' These things were our examples.' Even the mar- 
ginal translation, ' figures,' yields us no help. The 
mind of the Revisers seems to have been closed 
against any idea of St Paul being a Prophet, and 
yet he strove to make it clear that, for what the 
O.T. gave as a type, the time of the N.T. was ever 
ready with a fulfilment, if the Christian Prophets 
could supply it, whether as a warning or as a 

I Cor XII. lesson. Thus St Paul repeats his remark: 'Now 
these things happened unto them typically.' But 
all the notice which the Revisers can give him is 
to continue to translate ' by way of example.' The 
close connection between the ' murmurings ' and the 
' lustfulness ' of these ' arrogant ' persons is shown by 

1 Cor X 6. the neighbouring verse : ' That we should not lust 
after evil things, as they also lusted.' Again, their 

I Cor X 9. swelling words find a reference in: 'Neither let us 


tempt the Lord.' Lastly, their undue and venal 
respect for persons is closely parallel with St Paul's 
words : ' Ye look at what is in a face.' Here again = Cor x 7. 
the Revisers have erred in translating : ' Ye look at 
the things that are before ^ your face.' Once more : 
'His letters, they say, are weighty and strong; but his 
bodily presence is weak, and his speech of no account' 

IV. Sectarian. This term, as perhaps should 
have been remarked before, is not quite used in its 
modern sense, but some one word must be found 
and used to translate the one word cnroSiopl^ovre^, 
and ' sectarian ' seems the best. This feature has 
already been illustrated by features of the Corinthian 
Church (above, p. 256), and especially in regard to 
its connection with the carnal mind, which claims a 
freedom which is at enmity with the true freedom 
of the Spirit. 

It thus appears that before 58 A.D. every one of 
these several features of the ungodly described in 
Jude was recognised by an Apostle who addressed 
the Church of his own founding at Corinth, and 
that the ungodliness was at least in an equal stage 
of development with that which St Jude was com- 
pelled to combat in his Epistle. 

1 It is quite true that kotA is ' in a line with,' and so may be ' before.' 
But the meaning is quite tame and senseless if this translation be given 
here. There is nothing wrong in ' looking at the things before your 
face ' : far from it ; all must do so, if their eyes are not closed. The 
obvious reference is to the ' accepting of a man's person,' which God 
never does (Gal ii 6), and man should never do. 



General contrast of the two Recensions of Acts, /3 more 
prophetic, a less prophetic. 

It may at least be argued whether, if one of the 
Books of Holy Scripture had had to be forfeited, 
the Acts is not on the whole the one which we could 
least afford to lose. If St Matthew's Gospel has 
' exerted a greater influence than any book in the 
world,' we could supply some part of its loss from 
three other Gospels. If Isaiah awakened men from 
the sleep and indifference and depression of sin to 
the heavenly dawn of glad promise, the loss of his 
two golden volumes — had it taken place in 70 A.D., 
let us say — would be less than irreparable so long as 
we possessed so many of his verses in citation, al- 
though no possible collection of these fragments 
would avail to reproduce the Book of the Prophet 
Isaiah, the spiritual ancestor of St Paul and of every 
other regenerating agency that in these latter days shall 
renew the earth with blessings, and people it with 


the true children of the Highest. The Acts indeed 
is not so inspiring. Its effect is touching again and 
again, but scarcely thrilling, whatever its power may 
be to please, to convince, and to instruct. Yet it is 
so unique in its contents, so necessary for the under- 
standing of the N.T., of the Bible, of the Church of 
Christ, and therefore of all history from 30 A.D. on- 
wards, that, if lost, its loss could never be supplied. 
No wonder if, along with St John's Gospel, it is a 
favourite book with so many in modern days. 

And yet it is strange to find that St Chrysostom 
opens his Commentary on Acts with the remark : 
' Many people are unaware even of the existence of 
this book, and they know equally little about its 
author and compiler.' And elsewhere 1 he says : 
' Perhaps you do not hear the book read through- 
out the whole year (in Church).' Such neglect by 
the authorities of the ' early ' Church may strike us 
as surprising, but slowly we learn that the average 
well-informed Christian of (say) Constantinople in 
400 A.D. knew very little about the Bible, and it is 
a strangely interesting fact that the same Archbishop 
and Patriarch, who desires to make better known the 
treasure which he possesses in the Acts, was himself 
unaware of the very existence of 2 Peter, 2 and 3 John, 
Jude, and the Apocalypse. Not merely at one epoch, 
but through many centuries, the Acts was neglected 
in favour of the Gospels and the Epistles. Thus it 

' Chrysostom (Montf. ) vol. ix I, iii 66. 


has come to pass that comparatively few MSS. of the' 
Acts are now extant. 

But what adds very greatly to the documentary 
interest of the Acts is the discovery, mentioned 
already, that there are two editions of it in circu- 
lation — two Recensions, a and /3, probably both 
by St Luke.^ We are familiar with a, which sup- 
plied Chrysostom with the text of his commentary 
{395) at Antioch, for it closely resembles our 
English A.V. About the same time Jerome trans- 
lated the Acts in the Latin vulgate from a Greek 
text (also a) which, though different, did not differ 
so much as to suggest a different edition. We can 
find /3 of Acts in the text of the Bezan MS. D, 
and in Blass's Acta, and a few portions are given 
in R.V. margin. The question whether a and /3 are 
two editions seems almost decided, but the question 
whether they are wholly by the same author is, I 
think, only provisionally settled in the affirmative 
sense. The credit of establishing the former con- 
clusion rests in Germany with Fried. Blass, whose 

' The present writer is so convinced of the genuineness of both Acts 
and Luke and their identity of authorship that he does not consider the 
questions worth arguing until some entirely new discovery is made. 
The present work is written therefore upon a hypothesis, or rather at 
a certain stage of hypothesis. But of course every advance in the 
superstructure of a theory really depends upon the foundation and serves 
as a test of its soundness. If rotten, its rottenness would very soon 
appear in any and all attempts, such as those which are made in the 
present treatise, to go behind the writer's words and to grasp the en- 
vironment which immediately suggests his thoughts. 


classical learning and researches in the Greek 
orators were already famous, and who startled the 
theological world with a treatise ^ in 1894, followed 
by his edition of Acts with a Latin preface and 
commentary in 1895. Previous to this, however, 
in 1892-4, Dr. Rendel Harris had delivered his Four 
Lectures on the Western Text, in which he most ably 
reviews four separate and distinct theories, besides 
referring to Ramsay's chapter in The Church on the 
Roman Empire, and including his own Study of 
Codex Bezae? Students interested in this ' problem 
of problems ' are looking forward now to further light 
from Dr. Harris, Prof. Blass, and others. Meanwhile 
throughout the following pages it is assumed that the 
readings of the Western Recension, commonly denoted 
as /3, are distinct from and equally genuine with those 
of non-Western Recensions, commonly denoted as a, 
which may be read in Westcott and Hort's edition of 
the Greek Testament, and so far as my own observa- 
tion goes I entertain no doubt that most of the ^ 
readings represent the first draft of Acts by Luke. 
I wish I could feel the same degree of certainty that 
the a represent his own second and final draft. It 
seems to be an open question whether our present 
Acts has not passed under the pruning-knife of some 
orthodox critic soon after it was written. However it 
is not easy at present to discover any dividing line 
between the characters of ^ and a better than that 
1 Theol. Stud, u Krit. 1894. ^ Texts and Studies, 11 i, Cambridge. 



just mentioned as drawn by Blass. In most cases ^ 
and a appear to differ as the more diffuse from tiie 
more terse, only in the way of literary style. In 
some cases they differ very distinctly as the more 
personal from the less personal ; and here the very 
important character of ^ declares itself, as throwing 
invaluable light upon the author's personality. In 
some few there are important overflows in ^8 in the 
way of history, and some of these are recorded in the 
footnotes of WH and in the margin of R.V. In 
others again /3 presents the facts in a slightly different 
aspect. Of course not one of the divergencies is un- 
important. The present writer is not aware of one 
which adds a difficulty to the theories here put 
forward ; in chapters ii and iii above he has dealt 
with some passages of /3 which seem to him to fortify 
the conclusion that Luke is Silas, and to place it still 
more beyond a doubt. But even apart from this, he 
is convinced that an impartial study of jS tends to 
dispel and destroy the idea that Acts was written so 
late as 1 50 A.D. The ^ text shows throughout, the 
more closely it is examined, the primitive and inimi- 
table texture of genuine Apostolic work and thought 
and expression. 

This is perhaps nothing more than a personal 
statement, such as any writer is entitled to hold, but 
not to impose on others unless he can enforce and 
substantiate it by adequate evidence. This evidence 
must be supplied by textual critics, whose conclu- 



sions are waited for, and should be waited for, by 
those who attempt constructive criticism. At the 
same time the converse is also true. The textual 
critics ought to wait upon the results of constructive 
criticism, whether supplied by others or by them- 
selves. It • is a misfortune when textual and con- 
structive criticism are not united in the same person ; 
and they are too seldom united. The history of the 
text of the N.T. is to a large extent the history of 
movements in the Church, yet it has not hitherto 
been treated as such. Only in the Acts, perhaps, can 
we at present entertain a hope of discovering in the 
textual phenomena a clue to one particular part of 
the course of historical events. But here it does 
appear that we possess certain traces of a disappear- 
ing prophetic mode of thought, a prophetic way of 
viewing events, a prophetic treatment of O.T. Scrip- 
ture and uncanonical writings, which existed down 
to the year 70 A.D., and had ceased to exist by 140 
A.D. ; and those traces are largely connected with the 
variations in reading of the text of Acts. Unfor- 
tunately they cannot be included, except incidentally, 
in the compass of the present work. I may here only 
observe that the assertions contained in this volume, 
so far from professing to go unchecked by any other 
line of evidence, claim to be regarded in the light 
of any conclusions drawn from the textual history 
of Acts, and to throw light upon that history in 



The Acts not a production of the second century. 

But what has been said above upon the relation of 
Luke to Peter and Paul as their mediator will go far 
to explain the general proportions of the structure 
of Acts. It has been supposed by others that the 
remarkably even balance which is held in Acts— and 
this even balance is a clear and undeniable fact, to 
be shown in the next chapter — between the works of 
Peter in the first part and those of Paul in the second 
is a proof that some second-century writer wished to 
reconcile the followings of the two Apostles, and for 
this purpose, in collecting the historical materials of 
their lives, took care to provide a Rowland of the one 
for the Oliver of the other. Now it can hardly be 
too strongly asserted in reply to this, that the 
second-century writer, had he been able to do this 
as it is done in Acts, would have been not only 
far abler than St Luke was, but far the ablest 
writer of that or any other of the first ten cen- 
turies. He must have been a man of astonishing 
literary originality, scholarship, and force, and his 
knowledge and experience must have been cor- 
respondingly great. For the materials were not 
in existence in the first place for anything like 
such a work. There is scarcely a trace of any 
historical or biographical Christian writer before the 



time of Hegesippus (? 155 to 180 A.D.)^ Of the 
known second-century writers no Melito or Miltiades 
or Apollinaris or Caius ventured to say tiiat he had 
any materials whatever for composing or even for 
criticising a life of St Paul. How could our writer 
then have had the monopoly of all materials ? The 
Acts is plainly the work of one who has unlimited 
information bearing upon his subject, and is only 
embarrassed, if at all, by the amount of the material 
from which he has to select. He knows the name of 
a street in Damascus, the number of steps leading 
from the tower Antonia to the city of Jerusalem, the 
unusual title of the officer in Melita or Thessalonica, 
the name of a school at Ephesus, and he combines 
with this the knowledge of many other details of 
which we are amazed at his possessing an over- 
whelming monopoly. Yet beyond all these facts, 
the romancer, for such he would be, has provided and 
arranged his materials with such perfect art that to 
this day the closest criticism leads many scholars to 
the increasing conviction that they describe the ex- 
perience and impressions of an eye-witness, indirectly 
in the first part, and directly in most of the second 
and larger part of the work. 

Critics who are so ready to suppose a second- 
century historian are slow to reflect what enormous 
cheques they draw upon the resources of that Chris- 

i"It appears that Hegesippus' object was theological rather than 
historical." Westcott, Canon (1875), P' 20S- 



tian second century. It cannot possibly honour their 
drafts. Recognise the case as that of an eye-witness 
describing what he heard, saw and did in the first 
century, and all is easy : the eye-witness need not be 
a genius, and indeed he never professed to be one. 
But on the other hand imagine a romancer in the 
second century who is to write as easily and fully, 
with as much classic terseness and eloquence, and in 
some parts with as much Hebraic idiom, as if he had 
been a scholar and traveller and disciple of the first 
century, and an Apostle withal ; then, I contend, you 
must imagine a literary genius of the iirst order, 
an -authority whose existence cannot possibly have 
escaped notice by the Justin or Irenseus or Tertullian 
or the other Christian writers who by such hypothesis 
would be his own contemporaries. They at least 
could never have been so perverse or misguided as to 
antedate him by a century. Not one of them could 
combine, as our author has combined, the Hebraic 
idiom in some portions of his work with the Greek 
classical idiom in other portions, and in fact through- 
out the whole. 

A longer discussion of the statements in Acts, and 
of their character, and of the right way of explaining 
their character, cannot be attempted within the limits 
of this book, which has for its object to discover the 
characteristic features of a Christian Prophet in the 
writings of Luke outside the Gospels. Nor does it 
seem necessary to suppose a forgery even for the 


sake of argument, when it has once been shown 
that if any conciliation between Peter and Paul 
was required after Gal. ii was written, there are 
manifest signs that it actually took place, in the 
Epistles of I and 2 Peter and Ephesians, Luke being 
the mediator. For it will hardly be denied that 
whoever mediated in so important a cause would 
naturally be careful to retain traces of that relation to 
the two leading characters throughout the rest of his 
literary career. That he should think it desirable to 
exhibit some parallelism between the life experiences 
of the two Apostles is natural enough, and we shall 
presently see that Luke does this. (See chapter ix.) 

First, however, we proceed to examine one of the 
most important incidents of the whole work, the 
account of the first Christian Pentecost in Acts ii, to 
which reference has has already been made. We shall 
endeavour to gain from the literary texture of this 
account a clear understanding of the point of view 
from which the author wrote, and hence a clear 
understanding of what actually occurred. 

The Pentecostal Account in Acts and the Book 
of Enoch. 

When once the importance of the Book of Enoch 
is recognised as a powerful influence on the mind of 
the Christian Prophets, and especially of Luke, we 

Ac ii 33. 


may expect to find traces of it in various passages of 
his undoubted writings, the Acts, as we have already 
seen traces of it in i Peter. It will be convenient to 
EnA-c/. have one most important prophecy of Enoch 1 before 
us in full. It is as follows : 

'And now, my son Methuselah, call to me all thy 
brothers; for the word calls me and the spirit is 
poured out jipon me that I shall show you all that 
will befall you for ever.' . . 

3. ' And Enoch conversed with all the children of 
righteousness and spake; 'Hear, ye sons of Enoch, 

Ac ii 14. all the words of your father, andluarken befittingly to 
the voice of my mouth ; for I exhort you and say unto 
you, beloved, love righteousness and walk therein. 

4. And draw not nigh to uprightness with a double 
heart, associate not with those of a double heart ; but 
walk in uprightness and righteousness, and it will 
guide you on good paths, and righteousness will be 
your companion. 

5. For I know that a condition of oppression will 
increase on the earth and a great chastisement will 
be executed on the earth, and all unrighteousness 
will be consummated and be cut off from the roots, 

Gen xi 4. and its whole superstructure destroyed. . . . 

6. And unrighteousness will again be consummated 

1 Charles, The Book of Enoch, 1893, p. 265. The marginal 
references in the next four pages show the passages of N.T. which 
are directly drawn from the Book of Enoch, and those of O.T. 
which correspond \\\\h it. I beg the kind attention of the reader 
to them. 

Is xxviii 2^. 

Jam. i E 



on the earth, and all the deeds of unrighteousness 
and of violence and transgression will again prevail. 

7. And then, when unrighteousness and sin and 
blasphemy and violence in all kinds of deeds will 
increase, and apostasy and transgression and unclean- 2 Thess ii. 
ness increase, a great chastisement from heaven will 
come upon them all, and the holy Lord will come 
forth with wrath and chastisement to execute judg- 
ment on earth. 

8. In those days violence will be cut off from its 
roots and the roots of unrighteousness, together 
with deceit, and they will be destroyed from under 

9. And all the idols of the heathen will be aban- 
doned : the temples will be burned with fire and 
they will be removed from the whole earth, and 
the (heathen) will be cast into the judgment of 
fire and will perish in wrath and in grievous eternal 

10. And the righteous one will arise from sleep, 
and wisdom will arise and be given unto them.' 

1. ^And after that Enoch began to recount from En ^c///. 
the Books. 

2. And Enoch spake : ' Concerning the children of 
righteousness and concerning the elect of the world 
and the plant of uprightness, of these I will speak 
to you and announce to you, my sons, I, Enoch, 

1 I follow Dr. Charles's account of the displacement of the verses, 
and give them in what he concludes to be the proper sequence. 


according to that which appeared to me in the 
heavenly vision, and know through the word of the 
holy angels, and have heard from the heavenly 

3. And Enoch began to recount from the books 
and spake : ' I was born the seventh in the First 
week, while judgment and righteousness still tarried. 

4. And after me there will arise in the Second 
week great wickedness, and deceit will spring up ; 
and in it there will be the first end, and in it a 
man will be saved : and after it is ended unrighteous- 
ness will grow up and He will make a law for the 

5. And after that in the Third week at its close 
Ac 122, 5. a Man zvill be chosen as the plant of righteous judg- 
Aciiii4. ment, and after him will come for evermore the 

Ac ii 30 f. 

Plant ^ of righteousness. 

6. And after that in the Fourth week, at its close, 
Ac ii 17. visions of the holy and the righteous will be seen, 
Aciii22. and a law for all future generations and an enclosure 

Ac i 20. 

will be made for them. 

7. And after that in the Fifth week, at its close, 
will the House of glory and dominion be built for 

8. And after that in the Sixth week all those who 
Acxxviii26f. live in it will be blinded, and the hearts of all of 

Ac ii 17. - , . 

them will be given over to a wicked forgetfulness of 
Acii33. wisdom, and in it a Man will ascend; and at its 

1 'Fruit,' Acts I.e. 



close the house of dominion will be burnt with fire, and 

the whole race of the Elect root will be dispersed. Ac ii s- 

9. And after that in the Seventh week will awAciji. 

Ac ii 40. 

apostate generation arise, and many will be its deeds, 
and all its deeds will be apostate. 

10. And at its close will the Elect of righteousness 
of the eternal plant of righteousness be elected to 
receive sevenfold instruction concerning His whole 2 Pet is- 

. II. And after that there will be another week, the Enjfc/. 
Eighth, that of righteousness, and a sword will be 
giveti to it that judgment and righteousness may be Rom xiii 4. 
executed on those who cofnviit oppression, and sinners 
will be delivered into the hands of the righteous. 

12. And at its close'^ they will acquire houses i-k y.\\ 9- 

■' •' 2 Pet i 13 f. 

through their righteousness, and the House o/the great acIv n. 
King shall be built in glory for evermore. 

13. And after that in the Ninth week the righteous 
judgment will be revealed to the zvhole world, and all ^veim^o. 
the works of the godless will vanish from the whole 2 Pet iii ?■ 
earth, and the world will be written down ^ for 2 Pet iii 10. 

1 1 cannot refrain from observing here, in view of most persistent 
misunderstanding, that the Parable of the Unjust Steward (Lk xvi) is 
to be explained by reference to this verse. ' Make to yourselves friends 
outside of the mammon of unrighteousness, that when it shall fail, i.e. 
at the close of the Eighth week, they may receive you into everlasting 
habitations.' This is the only true moral of it. Space forbids the 
discussion of it here. For e/c outside of see Jebb on Soph, Track. 1078. 

2 The reading in 2 Pet iii 10 is a crux for critics. I have ventured 
to suggest (p. 136) that WH evpe0ria-eTai., which Dr. Hort considered 
to be only a makeshift reading, really conceals the true reading 


2 Pet. ii IS. destruction, and all mankind will look to the path of 


14. And after this in the Tenth week in the 
2Petii4. seventh part, there will be the great eternal y«^- 

ment, in which he will execute vengeance amongst the 

2Petmi2. 15. And the first heaven ivill depart and pass 
2 Pet iii 10. away, and a new heaven will appear, and all the 

powers of the heavens will shine sevenfold for ever. 

16. And after that there will be many weeks 
2 Pet iii 13. without number for ever in goodness and righteousness, 

and sin will no more be mentioned for ever. 

17. And now I tell you, my sons, and I shew you 
the paths of righteousness and the paths of violence, 
and I will shew them to you again that ye may 
know what will happen. 

18. And now hearken, my sons, and walk in the 
paths of righteousness and walk not in paths of 
violence ; for all who walk in the paths of un- 
righteousness will perish for ever.' 

En^c//. !■ Written by Enoch the scribe, this complete 

Lkvii35. doctriuc of Wisdom which deserves the praise of all 

men and is a judge of the whole earth, for all my 

children who will dwell on the earth and the future 

generations who will observe righteousness and peace. 

2. Let not your spirit be troubled on account of the 

■ypa<f>i]<xeTa.i, which was misunderstood and miswritten, and indeed 
could hardly have been recovered until the original in Enoch was 


times, for the Holy Great One has appointed days for 
all things. 

3. And the righteous one will arise from sleep, will Ephvi4, 15. 
arise and ivalk in the ^path of righteousness, and all 

his path and conversation will be in eternal goodness 
and grace [cf xci 10, And the righteous one will 
arise from sleep and zvisdom will arise and be given'^ 
unto thei>i\. 

4. He will be gracious to the righteous and will 
give him eternal uprightness, and will give him power, 
and he will live in goodness and righteousness, and 
will walk in eternal light. 

5. And sin will perish in darkness for ever, andAciiiig. 
will no more be seen from that day for evermore. 

Before attempting to apply this part of Enoch to 
the explanation of Acts ii, we must approach the 
subject from another point of vie'w, that of the writer. 

It cannot be denied that tongue-speaking was 
among the historical phenomena of the early Church, iCorxiviff. 
and that when St Paul treats of it he is deahng with 
a gift which he did not value so much as the 
Corinthians valued it or as he valued Prophecy, but 
which he recognised as a 'manifestation of the spirit j cor xii 7. 
to profit withal.' 

It is therefore plain that St Paul would accept, and 
we must accept, the account of Acts ii as dealing 
with the same kind of phenomenon as that which 

1 Cf Eph ' walk accurately, not as unwise, but as wise.' 


occurred so often at Corinth. There is nothing in 
common betweeit it and the speaking of foreign lan- 
guages, although it is usually supposed that the writer 
of Acts intended his readers to think that there was. 
The writer of Acts never intended any such thing, 
and so far from wishing to mislead, we may be sure 
that he, whose great distinguishing feature is can- 
dour, would have been the first to guard against his 
readers' misapprehension had he anticipated such a 
result of his words. The time, including the periods 
of which and at which he wrote, was one in which the 
whole ' world ' was ' of one speech and one language ' 
in a sense and to a degree which was never realised 
from the days of the Tower of Babel to the present 
year of Grace. The conquests of Alexander the 
Great had led to the overspreading of the known 
world by the Greek civilisation and the Greek 
language ; the conquests of Rome had utilised this 
extension of Greek civilisation for purposes of govern- 
ment and had still further unified the Greek world in 
which the Jews who used the Greek Bible were the 
most industrious promoters of trade and commerce. 
Greek was everywhere, and- when Juvenal, writing 
about 100 A.D. complains, 

Non possum ferre, Quirites, 
Graecam urbem. 

' Sons of Quirinus, I cannot bear my city to be Greek ' 
— we know that in Rome itself Greek was the lingua 
franca, and must have half supplanted the language 


of Quirinus in his own city of Rome. To this fact 
the Jewish catacombs and tlie other monuments bear 
witness. There is no question, and to St Luke's 
mind there could be no question, of the universal 
prevalence and predominance of the Greek language 
in the years 30-80. It is not, however, to be supposed 
that it would sound with the same accent everywhere. 
Different countries would make very different dialects 
of it, and hence mere pronunciation of it by the lips 
of strangers would have been perplexing. When, 
however, we find that tongues were an utterance of 
sounds difficult to interpret, so that the faculty ofiCor: 
interpretation was itself a 'spiritual gift,' and when 
we have to add this difficulty to the former and make 
allowance for intense excitement withal, we cannot 
be surprised if confusion ensued. 

The Apostles' utterance at Pentecost. 

However the first question which arises is, what 
was the substance of the words uttered by the 
Apostles on the day of the outpouring. For some- 
thing was heard, and therefore was uttered. Blass 
observes with less than his usual shrewdness here 
that " what follows after Acts ii S is narrated, even 
more than what precedes, prophetically rather than 
historically. As afterwards the Gospel was spread 
abroad through men of every nation, so at the birth 


of the Church it is said that men of every nation were 
present and took part in its beginning." Propheti- 
cally I agree, but not in the sense which Blass 
intends. Historically I assert against Blass. Blass 

Atiis. then smartly attacks the reading 'Jews/ which how- 
ever, is too well attested by the evidence of both 
editions of the Acts to be expunged from both. He 
would make all the men to be of divers nationalities 
and to be proselytes, and Luke distinctly says that 
they dwelt in Jerusalem. But those who find it hard 
to believe that proselytes of every one of these 
peoples were to be found resident there will be ready 
to believe that Jews from those countries,^ Jews of the 
Dispersion usually trading in the Eastern Provinces, 
could, on the occasion of this festal season, be found 
at their homes in Jerusalem. If at the Passover, 
seven weeks before this event, Simon the Cyrenian 
was in Jerusalem, if Aquila and Prisca of the more 
distant Pontus were found at Rome, and afterwards 

Acxviiiaf. ^t Corinth pursuing their trade of tent-makers, and 
at Ephesus, the same propensity to travel would, at 
the great feast of Pentecost, have brought" many 
thousands of Jews to the temple. Luke says that 

' See Schiirer, The Jewish People, etc., E. T. II ii 223, ' The Jews in 
those provinces were numbered not by thousands but by miUions. ' He 
quotes Sanhedrim x 3 of the ten tribes : " As the day becomes dark and 
then again light, so will it be one day light again to the ten tribes with 
whom it was dark.' There is no reason why this thought should not 
have been present to the mind of Luke. It was probably far older than 
the date at which it was put in writing in the treatise of the Mishna. 


these men were Jews by birth, born in places far 
distant, or at any rate directly come from {uiro) those Ac ii 5- 
places. They were devout Jews, and read their 
Bible. But wherever Alexander's conquests had 
extended, and indeed much farther,^ in the three 
centuries and a half which had succeeded them, the 
universal language of trade throughout the known 
East was Greek ; and these Jews read the Greek 
Bible in the LXX translation. 

Accordingly Luke says, ' they heard the Apostles 
speak in their own respective language^ or dialect 

^ There is at this day a considevable colony of Jews in S. Turliestan. 
See an article of great political interest by H. Norman, M.P. , in 
Scribiier's Ma«., Jan. 1901, on the Transcaspian Railway. 

- With every wish to do the fullest justice to the statements of that great 
teacher and divine. Dr. James Martineau, I must say that in matters of 
criticism I have found him on more than one occasion somewhat hasty 
in his conclusions. He does not distinguish, e.g. in the accounts of 
Saul's conversion, between aKoiw with the genitive case ' I hear (part 
of)' and with the accusative case 'I hear (directly).' Again in the 
present chapter he seems to me to ignore the fact that Luke says the 
hearers heard them speak both 'in their own]>espective language' 
(SidXe/cros verses 6 and 8) and ' in their own respective tongue ' (verse 
II). — Martineau, Seat of Authority in Religion, p. 273, ed. 1898. If I 
am correct, it follows that he is wrong in saying that by the author of 
Acts ^'tongues was construed into languages." Tongue always might 
mean language with Luke as with us, but in the case of the ' gift of 
tongues ' the phrase was always the same, stereotyped. The phrase 
• gift of languages ' was never used by Luke at all. No construing at 
all took place. If we turn to Genesis xi i we find ' the whole earth 
was of one lip and one language (0wp)7).' xii 7, ' Let us confound their 
language {-fKQiaaa.v], that they may not hear each the \oice [(l>avr]v) of 
his neighbour' xi 9 'There the Lord confounded the lips of all the 
earth, and from thence he scattered them. . . .' ^Ve cannot therefore 
doubt that ' tongue ' meant ' language ' always : but in the case of the 


{tyi ISla SiaXeKTw verses 6 and 8, and rai? ^fxerepai^ 
yXaicrcraig verse ii) the great (praises) of God.' Since 
Luke uses both terms, 'tongues' and 'dialect,' it is 
needless to discuss whether 'language' or 'dialect' 
is the better translation here : either meaning is 
allowed. The term ' dialect ' has been used just 
before, when he said that the name of Judas' field 
was ' in their dialect ('AKe\Sa/j.dx) Akeldamach.' This 
word is one that a Greek-speaking Jew, that is, a 
'Grecian ' (A.V.) or Hellenist, would use, but it is not a 
proper Greek word, for in order to arrive at its mean- 
ing we have to re-translate it first into the current 
Aramaic G kal-d' ma} All that Luke means here by 

' gift of tongues ' it did not mean ' foreign languages,' at least with Luke 
and the Christian Prophets. Nor do I agree with Blass that ' perhaps 
Paul differed from Luke in distinguishing between 0upa£ and ■yKwaaa.i 
in I Cor xiv lo ' : he is only giving an illustration here, and there is no 
difference between the two writers. 

' What was the real name of this field ? It was originally the 
Potter's Field according to Matthew xxvii 6, where by a strange 
blunder the fulfilment of a passage in Zechariah is said to be that of 
one in Jeremiah. However corrupt the text of Zechariah may have 
been in the hands of the Christian Prophets, — and there is no reason 
to think it was corrupted by them, — it would not account for the 
blimder of the name. But it may be worth while to ask whether the 
first word (Grecised as Akel) was not originally i'kar, price. The words 
in Zech xi 13 are as follows: (R.V.) 'And the Lord said unto me, 
Cast it unto the potter, the goodly price that I was prized at of them. 
And I took the thirty pieces of silver and cast them tmto the potter, in the 
house of the Lord.' For the words italicised, the Syriac reads into 
the treasury, which makes good sense. The Targum says the treasurer 
(see Dr. C. H. H. Wright's Bampton Lectures, " Zechariah and his 
Prophecies," p. 583), The rendering of R.V. is based upon Aquila's 
Greek version. It seems then very doubtful if there was any Potter's 


the term 'dialect' is a phonetic translation of the 
Aramaic into Greek : it expresses something which 
can be called Greek. And exactly the same is his 
meaning when he uses the term 'dialect' for the 
Apostles' Pentecostal utterance. The language was 
Greek which the 'dialect' reproduced with some 
modifications of pronunciation. There is a very fair 

Field in existence in Zechariah's time under that name, and whether 
Zechariah knew anything of a potter or, still more, of a field. Nor do 
his LXX translators; for in translating 'unto a smelting-furnace,' they 
confess that they have either no meaning in view, or at any rate not 
that. Other modern translations of the Hebrew are the treasurer, and 
the president. Now if, on the other hand, the word were originally 
Vkar-cfmah, it would mean the price of blood e^a-ctXy as Matthew xxvii 6 
says. The transliteration into Aceldama is just as easy as that from the 
Aramaic given in Acts i, if not easier, for the interchange of R and L is 
one of the commonest changes of sound. The story in Matthew is, as 
it stands, improbable ; for no field could be bought near Jerusalem for 
thirtj' pieces of silver, available as a cemetery, even for strangers. 
Moreover, a. field with a history, a. prophetic history connected with 
Zechariah, as this one purported to be, according to Aquila's transla- 
tion of the Hebrew (though even this has no reference whatever to a 
field), would not be acquired so easily as another, and would be less 
likely to be turned into a graveyard. If then the original name had 
been the ' field of the price of blood' for some historical reason unknown 
to us but easy to imagine, then the name after Judas' death received an 
explanation which it had not before, and the statement of Luke in 
Acts i is intelligible, while, on the other hand, the whole history 
of the name Potter's field is one that begins and ends with JIatthew 
xx%'ii. How it originated with Matthew is a question reserved for 
future consideration. Since writing the above I observe that Zahn, 
Einl. i 20, says that the first part of Akeldama has no essentially 
identical Hebrew word to support it. He throws a certain amount of 
doubt upon a derivation of the second part of the word from the Syriac 
damach, to sleep (cf cemetery), and seems to favour that from ghakal 
and datnah, blood. 


analogy offered in modern Church usage : any 
Englishman who has attended a Latin mass in France 
and in Italy may have noticed the difference /n 
pronunciation, let us say, between 

Dominus vobiiciim : Et ciiin spiritii tiio 

heard in the French Church and the more open sound 
of the same u by the Italian priest, who finishes the 
tiio as if it were a tooaw of our language. 

Moreover what would increase the difficulty of 
hearing is the fact that the Greek of Pentecost was 
delivered in a time and in a tone of the utmost 
excitement. Still although those Hellenistic Jews 
had not the ' spiritual gift of the interpretation of 
tongues,' as we infer from the fact that Peter subse- 

Ac ii 38. quently offered them the reception of the Spirit upon 
certain conditions, — they would just be able to 

Psixxiig. recognise what was uttered as 'the great (praises) of 
God.' For this phrase gives us the key to what was 
uttered. It occurs as a various reading in the Mag- 

Lki49. nificat, where it comes from the Psalm, and though 
we may not say that the term ' great deeds ' or ' great 
things ' (^eyaXera) is identical with ' great praises,' still 
to tell the great deeds is to jdter the great praises. 
Now if we ask how the great praises of God would 
be uttered on that day, we cannot doubt that the 
Great Hallel and the Hallelujah Psalms would guide 
the predominant note. It would not require a subtle 
power of interpreting tongues for any devout Jews 


to identify the general purport of such language, and 
to say that it was uttered in the dialect of their' birth, 
and the effect of it might well be described by Luke 
in the phrases which he has employed. 

[The foregoing remarks had been written some 
time before I found the statement in Lightfoot 1 upon 
the Hallel, which appears to confirm them entirely. 
" The Hallel, say they, recordeth five things : the 
coming out of Egypt, the dividing of the sea, the 
giving of the Law, the resurrection of the dead, and the 
lot of Messias." " This Hallel was said over eighteen 
days in the year and one night ; viz., at the killing 
of the Passover, at the Feast of Pentecost, on the 
eight days of the Feast of Tabernacles, on the eight 
days of the Feast of Dedication, and on the Passover 
night. With the manner of its saying over, the 
people still answering ' Hallelujah,' compare the 
redoubled 'Hallelujahs' in Rev xix i, 3, 4, 6." 

There is much more information concerning the 
use of Hallelujah in the same treatise of Lightfoot, 
drawn from the same sources. One statement refers 
to the brief Psalm cxvii, which belongs to the same 
'great Hallel,' which consisted of Psalms cxiii-cxviii. 
I can find no reference to Pss cxlvi and cxlvii which 
are about to occupy our attention. But in view of 
the fact that proper psalms were allotted by the 
Jews to certain days of the week and of the year 

ij. Lightfoot, T/te Temple Service, xii. Works, 1823, vol ix. 
p. 143, quoting Maimonides in Meg. 3 and the Talmud in Succah 5. 



for constant singing in the Temple, it seems clear 
that special psalms were the most natural vehicle of 
congregational emotion on special occasions ; and of 
these the later Hallel, Psalms cxlvi-end, would be 
appropriate to this first Christian Pentecost. That 
the occasion of so many Jews assembling in Jeru- 
salem was the ancient Jewish Feast of Pentecost is 
certain ; and it is certain that Pentecost commemo- 
rated above all things the giving of the Law on Sinai. 
But St Luke has not laid so much stress on this 
commemoration in his narrative as upon the other 
aspect of it, — the ' Building of the House of the 
Great King in glory for evermore ' as the ' fulfilment ' 
of the building of the Temple under Haggai and 
Zachariah. This we shall see as we proceed. It is 
noteworthy that there is a possible reference to the 
giving of the Law in the words 'tongues as of fire', 
for the Rabbis^ said : " At the time when learned 
men study in the Law, and thence proceed to the 
Prophets and the Holy writings a fire has flamed 
around them, and the words have lifted them up, as 
the same was done at the Sinaitic lawgiving. For 
Deutivii. was not the Law given at Sinai by means of fire.' 
The mountain burned with fire."] 

We may then go farther than this in identifying 
one or more of the Psalms which were sung by the 
disciples at this Pentecost. Many Psalms of the 

1 Schottgen, Hor. Heb., i 410, quoting the Midrash. But see below, 
p. 301. 


Fifth Book of the Psalter are entitled 'Alleluia' in 
the LXX version. Of these cxvii is one : 

Alleluia. Praise the Lord, all the nations, Ac iii 25. 

Let all the people praise him. Ac ii n. 

Another already often quoted is cxviii, which 
would give the following: 

Alleluia. Give thanks unto the Lord for He is good, 

For His mercy endureth for ever. . . . 
The stone ivhich the builders rejected, Ac iv u. 

This is made the head of the comer. 
This is the day which the Lord hath made : 

Let us rejoice and be glad in it. Ac ii 26, 46. 

Another is cxlvi, which we shall meet with pre- 
sently : 

Alleluia. Of Haggai and Zachariah. 

Praise the Lord, O my soul, . . . 
His spirit shall come forth, Ac ii 4. 

And shall convert unto his land. 
In that day shall all their divided thoughts perish. Ac ii 8. 

Another is cxlvii, which has the same title as the 


The Lord buildeth up Jerusalem, Ac iv u. 

And will gather together the dispersions of Israel. Ac ii gff. 

The correspondences are remarkable as showing 
how precisely in these Alleluia psalms do we find 
verses in the LXX version, which the hearers used, 
closely apposite to the outpouring of the Spirit. It 
is certain that Peter himself is made by Luke to 
connect a 'Psalm of David' which foretells the 


Exaltation of Christ with the joyful effects of the 
outpouring of the Spirit, for he comments on 

Ac ii 26. Wherefore my heart was glad and my tongice rejoiced 

by the remark a few verses later 

Ac ii 33. Being then by the right hand of God exalted and having 

received the promise of the Holy Spirit, from the Father's 
side he poured forth this v\fhich ye see and hear. 

If any question remained as to whether the Pen- 
tecostal utterances were of the nature of Psalm- 
singing, it would be immediately answered by com- 
paring the case of what is said to have happened a 
few days afterwards, when a renewal of the Pente- 
Aciv24, 31. costal outpouring took place. The Apostles when 
released by the Jewish rulers came to their own 
people and reported what the rulers had said. They, 
when they heard it, with one accord {o/ULoOvimaSov) 
lifted up their voice to God and said words express- 
ing the substance of two Psalms, cxlvi and ii, the 
former an 'Alleluia, the latter a Messianic Psalm. 

T/ie Prophetic Fulfilment of Acts i and ii. 
' Habitation! 

Before we leave the account of Pentecost other 
important questions arise and must be answered. 
One concerns the list of the nationalities : could this 
possibly have been recited by the hearers themselves ? 


It is altogether improbable that it was so recited. 
We shall then be right in deciding that verses 9- 11 
are parenthetical, the remark of Luke. This result 
at once takes us back to a passage in Acts i 18, 19, 
where WH mark a parenthesis though they do not 
do so here. So also Blass. Adopting i 18, 19 as 
Luke's own writing and not Peter's own speech, we 
observe that Luke explains the former of Peter's two Ps ixix 26. 
quotations from the Psalms as finding its 'fulfilment' Lkii. 
in the fact that Judas had acquired a plot of ground 
{xoapiov), for to this does the phrase ' his habitation ' 
{eTravXii) point. 'His habitation' cannot mean hispsdxs. 
' bishopric ' of the second quotation, which was to be 
filled up at once and not remain void. It is there- 
fore plain that Luke has exerted his own power of 
a Prophet in discovering the fulfilment of O.T. 
prophecy in the events recorded in Acts i and ii. 

A reference to the third fragment of Papias con- 
cerning Judas is made by Blass, who in his incisive 
manner calls Papias' account 'very stupid and dis- 
gusting.' Papias states that Judas was inflated so 
much that he could not pass through a narrow place, 
where nevertheless a cart passed and crushed him. 
The explanation of the story appears to be this. 
Papias had before him a reading of Acts i 18 where 
■7rp}]vh'i yevo/iievo^ ' falling headlong ' (A.V.) was given 
as Trprincrdel? ' thrown from a height,' and this in turn 
was mistaken as irprjcrOels 'inflated. 

In this connection it may be recollected that in 



the second century some of the Montanists were 
compared by the orthodox to Judas ; i this compari- 
son points to a lingering recollection that Judas was 
the typical false Prophet, as the Traitor of the true 
Prophet, his Master ; for the Montanists, conservative 
as they were in claiming Prophetical Succession, 
were excommunicated and denounced as false Pro- 
phets by the champions of orthodoxy. 

The reader will observe that the account given in 
Matthew that Judas ' hanged himself,' is to be kept 
entirely distinct. Acts does not say a word about 
hanging. Nor does Papias, though he speaks of the 
' inflation,' probably through the aforesaid error in 
Ac i 1 8. How the account in Matt arose must be 
reserved for the present. Meanwhile the remark of 
John Lightfoot, Hor. Heb. Exerc. on Matt xxvii 5, is 
interesting as showing what the most learned and 
able theologian of England thought in the year 1658: 
" Interpreters take a good deal of pains to make Ac 
i 18 agree with his hanging himself; but indeed all 
will not do. I know the word aTD^y^aro is commonly 
applied to man's hanging himself, but not to exclude 
some other way of strangling. And I cannot but 
take the story (with good leave of antiquity) in this 
sense : After Judas had thrown down the money, 
the price of his treason, in the Temple, and was now 
returning again to his mates, the devil, who dwelt in 
him, caught him up on high, strangled him, and 

' The Christian Prophets, p. 37. 


threw him down headlong ; so that dashing upon the 
ground, he burst in the midst, and his guts issued 
out, and the devil went out in so horrid an exit." 
We gratefully and humbly receive all the stores of 
John Lightfoot's vast learning ; but it is vain to 
pretend that we look at things, theological or secular, 
now with the same eyes as he did 250 years ago. 
And is it reasonable that the same Prayer-book 
which satisfied him should satisfy the needs of our 
country now } The belief in Demonology in 1658 
was as great, in some learned minds, as it was in 75 
A.D., and the absurdities of it far greater than we can 
lay to the charge of St Luke and the Christian 

Confusion of Tongues. 

But there is more 'fulfilment' still. In order to 
understand the important position which the gift of 
tongues occupies in the history of the Acts, we must 
place ourselves in the position of Luke and Peter as 
two Prophets who had studied not only the Canonical 
O.T. Books, but that of Enoch also. It must occur 
to us to ask. Why is the outpouring of the Holy 
Spirit accompanied by tongue-speaking as its evi- 
dence rather than by prophesying.' In connection 
with the long quotation made by Peter from Joel, ac ii 17-21. 
there were very remarkable fulfilments: there was 


the outpouring of the Spirit itself ; there was prophe- 
syifig j there were visions and dreams ; all to be 
recognised in the N.T. narrative of the occurrences 
connected with the Crucifixion of our Lord : there 
were also the darkness and the earthquake at the 
Crucifixion itself besides the expectation of the 
final judgment. But Joel contains no prophecy 
or prophetic type that can be fulfilled exactly 
by the speaking with tongues. The quotation from 
Joel is so long and so suggestive that by the end of 
it we have almost forgotten that the one difficulty 
which the Apostle set himself to explain, why sober 
men were so noisy and excited that to mocking 
spectators they appeared to be drunken when they 
were speaking with tongues, is not explained at all. 
Was it enough to say that nobody was drunken so 
early in the day ? Or does the antithesis in verse 
16, ' But this is that was spoken by Joel,' not lead 
us to expect an explanation t 

The fact is that we are indeed led to expect it, 
and we are forced to look for it among the earlier 
scriptures, and to explain the gift of tongues by 
connecting it first of all, with the confusion of 
tongues at the tower of Babel. This is not exactly 
a ' fulfilment,' but it is the counterpart of it ; it is part 
of the ' restitution of all things ' which Peter refers to 
shortly afterwards, a restoration of things which were 
believed to have been removed from their place and 
altered for the worse in consequence of Adam's fall, 



and now put right again at the last. Thus the 
first Adam had his restitution in the second Adam : iCorxv45. 
the first creation had its restitution in the new Ap ii 7. 
creation :^ the Garden of Eden had its restitution in Apxxii2. 
the paradise of God, with its tree of life whose leaves 
should heal the Gentiles : the Deluge had its resti- 
tution or antitype in Christian Baptism : ^ the tower ^ i Pet iii 21. 
of Babel in House of God : the confusion of tongues 
in the gift of Tongues. 

Parthians and Medes. 

This observation takes us once more direct to the 
Book of Enoch, which deals at length with the con- 
sequences of the Deluge. It might be supposed that 
the account in Genesis would suffice to provide 
the necessary prophetic material for the ' fulfilments ' 
or "restitutions' of Acts ii. We find however that 
this is not so in the case of the nationalities whose 
names are cited in a long list as having furnished 
representative witnesses of the Gift of Tongues at 
Pentecost. We search in vain in the pages of O.T. 
to find the 'Parthians.' The Parthians and Medes 
are not the same as the Medes and Persians. Blass 
is right in saying that the list of the witnesses of the 
gift of tongues is so arranged as to start with the 
far East and proceed generally to the West. But why 
iSee p. 136 above. ''See p. 137 above. "See p. 141 above. 


should the start be made with the people of the far 
North-east, which is not recognised in Scripture ? 
Why begin with the Parthians ? On this point he 
is silent. So are all commentators. The list in 

Gen X 2. Gen X of the generations of Noah, Shem, Ham, and 
Japhet would, it is true, provide Luke with -Medes, 
the descendants of Japhet through Madai, who is 
placed third to Gamer (presumably the Gog of 

Ezxxxviiia. Ezekiel) and Magog. It would also provide him 
with Elamites, the descendants of Elam, the first- 
born of Shem. But it does not suggest the Parthians. 
It seems then that we must find the explanation in 
concluding that the Parthians come to him through 

Ez hi 5. the following passage of the Book of Enoch : ' And 
in those days will the angels return and hurl them- 
selves upon the East, upon the Parthians and Medes, 
to stir up the kings and to provoke in them a spirit 
of unrest, and rouse them from their thrones, that 
they may break forth from their resting-place as 
lions and as hungry wolves among their flocks. And 
they will march up to and tread under foot the land 
of His elect ones.' 

The Parthians were expected by the Prophets 

Apixis. to play some important part in the future con- 
summation, though it is not clear exactly what 
part,i and probably the Christian prophecy would 
vary greatly on this subject from time to time, 
keeping in view, however, the prophecy of Enoch, 

'See The Christian Prophets, p. 121. 

t • • t 


and always seeking its fulfilment. Here, for instance, 
it is possible that Luke began to see a spiritual inva- 
sion of the Holy Land by Parthian Jews which 
should contribute to the prophesied failure of the 
physical invasion. It is probable also that Medes 
were closely connected in his mind with the Parthians 
by the reading of this prophecy, and that the names 
were given in the same order as in Enoch without 
further regard to the details of the prophecy. 

The Building of the House of the Great King. 

The connexion with Enoch is certain. And if we 
now return to p. 276 ff. above, we shall see that all the 
passages there italicised are before Luke's mind when 
he writes the Acts, as the marginal references there 
given shew. We further observe in the same passages 
a remarkable parallel in Rom and another in Eph, 
both being Epistles which he had particular reason 
for knowing, as the amanuensis of the former and 
the prompter of the latter. But while Luke has 
embodied in Acts, Luke, and 2 Peter so many 
references to Enoch, it may still be asked. Where 
is the reference to the confusion of tongues .' The 
reference is Enoch xci 5 (above). The Superstructure 
there mentioned is a quaint reference to the Tower 
of Babel. The first ' great chastisement ' is naturally 
the Deluge, after which the unrighteousness gathers 
head till its ' whole superstructure is destroyed,' then 


the course of Enoch's prophecy passes rapidly for- 
ward to later times of apostasy ^ and idolatry : we 
discern from it that the Temple of Solomon is built 
at the end of the Fifth week ; Elijah ascends in the 
Sixth week ; and the Temple is destroyed and the 
Jews dispersed, and so forth. The Christian Prophets 
would thus understand that the Tower of Babel, 

Gen xi 9. where ' the Lord did confound the language of all the 
earth, and from whence the Lord scattered them 
abroad upon the face of all the earth/ had been 
prophetically set in correspondence with the Temple 
of Solomon, and finally with the spiritual House 
of God which is the theme of i Peter and Eph and 
the other like passages. And the gift of tongues 
would be to them a perpetual reminder, first, of the 
dispersion, by which mankind first and then the Jews 
were punished, and, next, of the ' restoration' from it, 
promised in Messiah, whereby the scattered should 

Ac ii 39. once more be gathered into one. 

The rushing mighty wind and the fire. 

If then the above is a true account, or something 
like it, of the connexion between the gift of Tongues 

^ The fact that a ' crooked and perverse generation ' is a quotation 
from Deut xxxii 5 does not in any way prevent it being also a reminis- 
cence of Enoch xciii 9. It only means that this particular link in the 
chain of Enochian prophecies had received confirmation by being 
identified with the isolated term in Moses' song. We do not possess 
this portion of Enoch in the Greek. 


and the day of Pentecost, what, let us ask finally, is 
the connexion between the latter and 'the rushing 
mighty wind' ? We must be very careful to observe 
the use of as, for the term of comparison. St Luke 
says 'there was a sound as of {wa-Tvep) a rushing 
mighty wind' : he also says 'tongues as of(wa-el) fire.' 
He also says later on of St Paul's recovery of his 
eyesight, ' there fell from his eyes as it had been (to?) 
scales.' These expressions are certain to cause a 
false impression, which, however, was not intended by 
their author. The same is true of the descent of the 
Holy Ghost at the Baptism of Jesus, 'in bodily form 
as (ft)?) a dove.'* A great effort of mind is continu- 
ally needed if we are not to confuse the actual thing 
with that to which it is compared. Resemblance 
tends to be confused with identity. Who can say 
that he does not usually and habitually think that 
a rushing wind was actually part of the event of 
Pentecost as described in Acts .'' or that fire was not 
also a part .'' Yet, if he so thinks, he is in error. 
There was a sound which sounded like wind, but was 
not wind. There were 'tongues' which looked like 
fire and were not fire. There were obstacles to 
sight removed from St Paul's eyes which were like 
scales, but were not scales. Now, just in this very 
distinction lies St Luke's safeguard. He cannot be 
accused of an intention to deceive unless, indeed, 
there are other grounds for such an accusation. He 

1 Even the author of Ecce Homo fell into this error. 


1 Pet iii 20. 

2 Pet iii 6. 

Is xxix 6. 
Ac i 20. 

has used these marks of comparison dehberately for 
prophetical reasons. In the case of the scales he is 
thinking of the recovery of sight by Tobit. I n the case 
of the dove at the Baptism, he is thinking of the dove 
sent forth during the Deluge, which we know he has 
used twice in the Petrine Epistles as a type of Chris- 
tian Baptism. In the case of the fire and the rushing 
mighty wind we have equally to seek for a typical 
origin in Scripture. And if we look in that very 
passage which has been so often before us already 
where the ' corner-stone is laid for the foundation of 
Sion ' we are not disappointed, for we begin to see in 
the two adjacent verses two references to a ' rushing 
whirlwind.' This is only in LXX, for it appears in 
R.V. of the Hebrew as 'the overflowing scourge,' and 
in that form it is unrecognisable. But we have only 
to look forward some fifteen verses in order to find 
the crucial passage on which Luke's description and 
comparison turns. 

' For visitation ' {eiria-Ko-Tr^, bishopric, is the same 
word in its other meaning) ' shall be with thunder 
and earthquake and a great voice, a rushing whirl- 
tvind and aflame of fire devouring.' 

Disjoined from their context — and we have seen 
how the Christian Prophets habitually^ disjoined 
words — these expressions would be interpreted of 
the new and fiery zeal which should animate the 
church when it entered on its bishopric of the world. 

' See The Christian Prophets, p. 62 ff. 



This is the thought which underlay St Luke's 

The fulfilment of Psalm xvi. 

When we pass on to observe the other prophecies 
which are so frequent in the early chapters of Acts, 
we cannot fail to be struck with the important place 
assigned there to Psalm xvi. The present writer Ac ii 25. 
regrets to see that the high authority of Dr. Driver ^ 
is opposed to the Davidic authorship of this Psalm in 
spite of its strong Davidic character. Regarding the 
Psalm by itself, and quite apart from its applied 
interpretation, if we inquire what its primary meaning 
is, it seems impossible to see how any other Psalmist 
could succeed in placing himself so entirely in the 
position of David as to be able to compose the 
verses quoted. ' I have set the Lord before me 
always : because He is at my right hand, I shall not 
be moved.' The position at the right hand was that 
of one who was completely trusted, because it was 
the side on which the trusting host was defenceless : 
against any stranger on his left hand he could guard 
himself by keeping his right hand upon the handle 
of the sword which hung at his left : in one instant it 
could be drawn by the right hand and plunged into 
the dangerous foeman on the left. It may be granted 
' The Parallel Psalter. 


that this was a very ancient fancy, and that it 
continued to hold good of a later age than that of 
David ; but whom does it suit so well as a warrior- 
king surrounded by foes, one trustful by nature, but 
taught by experience to doubt, and therefore doubting 
what mortal man to trust ? ' My flesh also shall dwell 
in safety ' must be understood of this life (Perowne). 
The following words, ' Thou wilt not leave my 
soul (life) in the pit, nor wilt thou give thy Holy 
(anointed) one to see corruption ' are words which 
take us straight to the limestone caves and fissures 
of the hill-country of Judea, in which David and 
1 Sam xiii 6. all outlaws were glad enough to seek refuge. They 

iSamxivii. & & & J' 

' wandered in dens and caves of the earth.' These 
hiding-places, often large enough only for a single 
occupant, were liable to be fouled with the remains 
of wild animals and other refuse swept in by flood- 
water. Hard to enter and noisome to remain in, to 
come out of them was hardest of all ; they were 
places where one might indeed fear to 'see corrup- 
tion.' But the Psalmist adds, ' Thou shalt make me 
know the path of life,' that is, the path by which, 
extricated from the pit or den of the earth, I may 
escape from Saul and save my life, whether on this 
side of some hill Hachilah or on that. Lastly, 
'Fulness of joy in thy Presence' will more than atone 
for all the trials of my present exile. 

It would be interesting to know if there are any 
cogent reasons why this should not be said by David. 


Even if the former part of the Psalm is of later 
origin, this latter part has all the ring of ancient 
simple genuine experience. However, we cannot 
hold that there was any conscious prophecy on 
David's part. He was a prophet in the sense of 
uttering words in which later ages would find a 
meaning which he never saw and could not imagine. 
It is also an untenable theory that he was one of 
those who ' sought out and searched out ' a hidden 
meaning in his own words: The word which Luke 
applies to David, that he ' foresaw ' this, may not ac ii ; 
be interpreted so as to introduce confusion into life. 

Still it is only fair to quote Dr. Driver's own 
words ^ : " The revelation of a future life was only 
accomplished gradually ; and though there are 
passages in the prophets which contain this great 
truth in germ, and though the intuition of it is 
expressed at certain sublime moments by some of 
the Psalmists (Ps xvi, xvii, xlix, Ixxiii), yet these pas- 
sages altogether are few in number, and the doctrine 
formed no part of the established creed of an ancient 
Israelite." As a general statement this appears to 
the present writer to be eminently just, but the 
imagery employed in our particular citation appears 
to him to be so peculiarly apt in the mouth of David 
himself, so simple and true to nature, so redolent of 
the field-warfare in which he was long engaged, that he 
finds it easier to believe that it belongs to a Psalm or 

"^ Int. to the Literature of the O. T., 3rd ed., 1892, p. 443- 


Michtam {stamp) of David than to think that any later 
composer possessed the idyllic imagination adequate 
to the composition of it. That the author was think- 
ing of his field-warfare chiefly, and that he started 
from that pressing personal experience rather than 
from any meditations on a future life, appears to me 
certain. In any case the passage will ever remain 
one of the most noteworthy instances of ' fulfilment,' 
or, as we should say, of the application of O.T. 
words to the facts of N.T. history, after the example 
of Him who said, ' I came not to destroy the Law 
and the Prophets, but to fuliil them.' 



Passages referring to Ecstasy in Acts: Simon 
Magus: Philip. 

Some questions relating to Ecstasy fall next to 
be considered. The R.V. says twice that Simon 
Magus, who used sorcery in Samaria, ' amazed the a vh; 9, n 
people ' in their metropolis. But this was no ordinary 
astonishment. The Greek word means ' to produce 
ecstasy.' The translation of A.V. bewitched is quaintly 
forcible now that the belief in witchcraft is extinct : 
but it was terribly dangerous in 161 1 when it was 
adopted. What Simon did was to throw those who 
accepted his instructions into ecstasy. No doubt the 
belief of the Christian Prophets was that this was 
parecstasy or false ecstasy, the same state which in 
the second century Claudius Apollinaris and others 
complained that the Montanist Prophets^ super- 
induced upon their victims and themselves. But in 

> This is discussed in The Christian Prophets, pp. 16-40. 


Simon's case the falsehood of it was so clear from 
the attendant circumstances that it has naturally 
not been embodied by St Luke in the term which 
he applies to the actions of Simon. 

It was left for Justin Martyr (140-150 A.D.) to 
fall into his unfortunate blunder concerning Simon 
which led the world astray for fifteen hundred years. 
He said that " a certain Simon of Samaria, a native 
of a village called Gitton, lived in the times of 
Claudius Caesar, and after using the art of the 
operating demons to do magical powers in Rome, 
was held to be a god and has been honoured by the 
Romans as a god, with a statue erected on the Tiber, 
between the two bridges, with the Latin inscription : 
Simoni Deo Sa^icto!' The base of this statue, with 
the inscription ^ beginning Semoni Sanco Deo, was 
dug out of rubbish on the island in the Tiber in 1574, 
and Justin was thereby proved' to have made two 
mistakes in quoting three words which he had pre- 
sumably read himself in situ, besides the error of 
identifying a Sabine deity — for such was Semo 
Sancus — with a Samaritan magician. He recurs ^ 
to his charge against the Romans and further says 
that the Samaritans had been induced by the evil 
demons to listen to the claims of one Menander^ 

1 Orelli Inscr., i p. 337 n. i860 (Jahn). 
^ApoL, i 56. 

^ It seems possible that the name Menandros may be hidden in some 
false reading of Acts viii 9 /j.^yav, or 13 /j.eydXa!. 

S/J/OX]- 309 

along with Simon. However the bearing of the 
statements in Acts was wholly lost upon Justin, 
and Irenaeus is also misled. 

What happened was as follows : Simon used to 
practise ' ecstasy ' before he was baptized as a ac viii 13. 
believer, and after this he continued to put himself 
into that state while attending closely on St Philip. 
To translate this word (e^iWaTo) again ' amazed,' as 
R.V. does, is possible, but the other meaning seems ac 1x21,117. 
far more natural ; for Simon had seen the mighty 
works of healing already, as described in verse 7, and 
the sight of them had led to Simon's belief and 
baptism. His ' amazement ' comes therefore much 
too late in the course of the narrative. The state- 
ment in the Acts rather goes to shew that Simon 
continued after his belief and baptism to practise 
ecstasy in himself without condemnation. The sin 
only began when he aspired to equal rank with the 
Apostles, and like another Balaam, but conversely to 
him, thought that the gift of God was purchased by 

In the same chapter, the substance of which was 
very probably communicated to Luke by Philip or 
his daughters who prophesied at Caesarea, a question ac xxi s. 
arises whether we should translate verse 39, ' the 
spirit of the Lord caught away Philip' with R.V., 
which Blass calls ' rather absurd ' ; or, as he translates, 
'a wind of the Lord,' referring to prophetic passages jKixviUia. 
in the O.T., where, however, R.V. still translates 'the E^iiiu-' 



spirit of the Lord.' It has been supposed that some 
early copyists, who failed to understand the meaning 
' wind ' in the case of Philip, interpolated a remark 
concerning the Eunuch, so that they have produced 
the following form of the verse : ' And when they 
came out of the water, the Holy Spirit fell upon the 
Eunuch, but the angel of the Lord caught away Philip.' 
. . . This at least is Blass's supposition. And it is 
perhaps noteworthy that though the catching may be 
attributed to an angel at the moment^ of ecstasy in 
corxii2, 4. N.T., still ecstasy can never account for the sudden 
physical removal of an individual from one part of 
the world to another, nor would the language of 
ecstasy ever be used of such removal. We can there- 
fore more easily suppose that the original reporters 
of the occurrence employed the figurative language 
of O.T. Prophets to describe it, whether they said 
\c xxiii 9. ' angel ' or ' spirit.' The passage is one of those in 
which it is hard to see that the two recensions of Acts 
shew any sign of proceeding from more hands than 
one. There is no more reason to accept Blass's 
account of a later interpolation than to hold, in accor- 
dance with Blass's own general idea, that Luke toz- 
j^^ curtailed the slight verbosity of /3 by altering it to 
the form of a. 

1 Cf. The Christian Prophets, p. 42 n. 


The Conversion of Saul. 

The question next arises in connexion with what 
has been said of ecstasy, whether the great and 
momentous occurrence on the road to Damascus is 
itself to be explained by the ecstatic state. The 
answer at first seems to be that a distinction is made 
between ecstasy and Saul's condition at the time in 
question, as if to shew that they were not the same : 
and if so, we could not possibly have more decisive 
evidence for the negative conclusion, for both Luke 
and Paul were well aware of the meaning of ecstasy, 
and the latter was the source of the former's infor- 
mation here. The distinction rests, first, upon St 
Paul's statements : ' Have I not seen Jesus our ac 
Lord ? ' ' Last of all he was seen of me also ' ; from i Cor x'VV 
which many persons infer that he himself believed 
that he saw Jesus on this occasion : and secondly, 
on the statement that ' there fell from his eyes as it Ac u m. 
were (wy) scales,' which seems to imply the removal 
of some outward physical cause of blindness, at least 
as subsisting in St Paul's own mind, though it may 
very well be that a modern surgeon would have 
given a different diagnosis of the patient. But we 
have seen in the last chapter that ' as it were ' (wy 
wcrei) was a regular prophetic term for expressing 
parallelism with known types, and so here allowance 
must be made for the fact that a recovery from 

IX 17. 
I Cor ix 1 


Tob xi 13. blindness was attended in the apocryphal history of 
Tobit with these very symptoms: 'The white films 
(XevKcofiara) were scaled from the corners of his eyes.' 
If therefore another recovery from blindness had to 
be described in scriptural language, it was very likely 
that the phraseology would be repeated, especially 
with the cautious addition of ' as it were.' Still, even 
with these deductions, it appears at first sight that St 
Paul himself speaks as if the occurrence were any- 
thing but a case of ecstasy. Let us, however, leave 
the question here till we have examined further into 
the case of Peter's conversion. 

The narrative contains other difficulties, especially 
in ix 12, as Blass observes : 

(i) A vision is contained in another vision. 

(2) This is said to have been seen by Saul who is 
about to be healed by the agency of Ananias. 

(3) Though this is indicated, it does not appear that 
Ananias has been informed yet of the loss of sight. 

(4) Saul in his vision has seen even the name of 
his visitor Ananias. 

(5) Ananias derives his instructions about what he 
is to do by a circuitous inference from the vision seen 
by Saul. 

Blass, therefore, suggests that ix 12 should be 
omitted with the Fleury palimpsest representing /3, 
its presence being explained as constructed out of 
materials to be found in verses 17 and 10. I would 
rather say that here is another case of Luke inserting 



a few words of his own by way of explanation as 
we have seen in Acts i and ii.^ The speech of the 
Lord would then end at the words, ' for behold he 
prayeth.' And verse 12 would be a parenthesis by 
Luke. The Peschitto, so far as that goes, favours 
this solution of part of the difficulty, for it says— 
I refer to Blass — ' when he was praying he saw 
{cum ipse oraret vidit). . . .' It seems hardly neces- 
sary to deal with the five objections given above, 
if this simple expedient be accepted. Of course, in 
every history there are details of description which 
have to be sacrificed to brevity, and in this case there 
are many which are left to be understood. The 
decisive 'go thy way' in verse 15 sounds like a 
command intended to cut short a dialogue which 
would tend to become absurd if prolonged. 

Dr. J. Martineati on Retrospective Reconstruction in 
the Acts. 

The 'Conversion' of Saul is a term commonly 
applied to the occurrence on the road to Damascus, 
but it is a term which has no scriptural authority as 
applied thus. St Paul, so far from applying it to him- 
self, gives no account of the event in his Epistles. In 
one way it is an objectionable term, in that it implies 
that St Paul was once converted from a sinful life. 

1 P. 293 above. 


So marked is the absence in St Paul's Epistles of 
any reference to the three narratives of it in Acts 
that many writers have asserted it to be unhistorical. 
Here, for instance, is the conclusion of so important 
a writer as James Martineau ^ on the author of Acts : 
'' His work is a retrospective reconstruction of a 
drama which has long passed from the stage, and 
which can be recovered only by shreds of scenery 
preserved by rumoured memories, by portraits and 
costumes of the chief actors, and by reasoning back- 
wards from the known catastrophe. Passages of 
successful restoration there may be, but the life and 
genius of the whole are not there. The imitation 
could hardly change so seriously the colouring and 
proportions of the original without the refracting 
power of a generation between." This serious indict- 
ment requires a serious answer, which can hardly be 
furnished without a clear understanding of the 
Christian Prophets and their point of view. Let 
us examine it in its particular assertions. 

That a generation elapsed between the ' Conversion ' 
of Saul and the writing of the Acts is not only pro- 
bable, but certain. But that a generation elapsed 
between the things described in the last verse of 
Acts xxviii and its composition is most improbable. 
That the colouring and proportions of the original are 
so seriously changed can only be ascertained .by close 
examination of what materials we possess, and the 

1 Seat of Authority in Religion, p. 285 (1898). 


present writer is only one of many who are doing 
their best to examine those materials and to test the 
trustworthiness, especially the pages of Acts them- 
selves. He finds, the more he studies, that the life of 
the -whole, if not perhaps the genius— {ox that is a very 
uncertain term — is there. That the work is a retro- 
spective reconstruction of a drama which has passed 
from the stage, but not long passed, is true. So it 
may be said of every historical work. Shreds of 
scenery preserved are numerous indeed, especially 
when we include those ' Western ' readings of the /3 
recension which add so greatly to the text of the 
Revised Version, and which it is not unreasonable to 
believe with Blass to be from the author's own hand. 
Portraits and costmnes of the chief actors are what we 
expect in every history in which the life of the whole 
is there, and, if we take 'costumes' in a figurative 
sense, they are there. The portraits, too, are good, 
with certain limitations. They are drawn by the 
outlines of the actions and speeches, all epithets 
being sternly withheld from the characters. 

Reasoning backwards frotn the known catastrophe is 
a phrase not so easy to understand. The latter 
words, which are used in the dramatic sense, seem to 
mean the destruction of Jerusalem, and, if so, there is 
no doubt that this process of reasoning was a difficult 
one. It is not easy to exaggerate the shock which 
the event of A.D. 70 would produce upon the mind 
of a devout ], or a Jewish Christian, accustomed 


to worship in the Temple, to attend the great feasts 
Rom'yi'ff ^^ Jerusalem, and to regard the Holy City as St 
Paul did himself with a longing pity and unceasing 
pain, for the slavery which she endured with her 
children, and with a love which saw in her the 
type by restitution ^ of 'the Jerusalem above, the free, 
the mother of us all.' Never in the whole history 
of the world have the hopes of a nation been so 
overwhelmingly shattered, never have the associa- 
tions of any citizens been so blasted and withered, 
their memories so wounded, their richest feelings 
so despoiled, as when the walls and gates of the 
daughter of Sion were brought down and laid low 
even with the ground. One marked effect which the 
destruction of Jerusalem had upon the Christian 
Church was naturally to separate their prospective 
view of the end of the world from their prospective 
view of the end of Jerusalem. Consequently we find 
a much calmer tone pervading the Acts upon the 
question of the ' consummation of the age ' than we 
find even in St Paul's Epistles, and, of course, 
intensely more than in Jude, 2 Peter, and Apoca- 
lypse. Again, it is probable that Stephen would 
not have been represented as a true prophet in 
Ar vi H- regard to his ' words against this Holy Place ' unless 
these words had been verified by history. 

At the same time it would be only a vain imagina- 
tion to suppose that Acts shows any sign whatever of 

^ Le. an antitype, see p. 297. 


' Gnostic sects 1 which so agitated the church of the 
second century.' 

Martineau's statement that 'the work (Acts) is 
certainly post-apostolic' will be met throughout 
these pages with counter-argument, and since 
Martineau wrote, both Zahn and Harnack have 
written agreeing in a date which is many years 
short of 100 A.D. 

If then the date of the composition of Acts were 
a few years after 70 it would not be surprising if 
in the course of reasoning backwards we found that 
some refraction had taken place, causing a certain 
difference of proportion in the view of objects — such 
a refraction as occurs daily when the sun is visible, 
and tends to the gratification of our sense of sight. 
This is eminently in accordance with the daily course 
of nature which presents us with the same landscape 
which, nevertheless, is not the same. But while this 
is so, it is also true that when an object is refracted 
we distrust our sense of sight for the purpose 
of obtaining a mathematically scientific observa- 
tion, except under conditions of knowing the true 
amount of refraction, and allowing for it accordingly. 
It is possible for a historian to write so as to be too 
scientific for the common reader. Refraction is not 
an ill term to apply just to that amount of adaptation 

1 Martineau, Seat of Authority, p. 249. ' The grievous wolves ' of St 
Paul's speech at Miletus have been explained in The Christian 
Prophets, p. 181. The date of Theudas is dealt with below, p. 327 ff. 


or adjustment which is necessary to commend his 
history to the common reader. 

For Wisdom dealt with mortal powers, 
Where truth in closest words shall fail, 
When truth embodied in a tale 

Shall enter in at lowly doors. . . . 

Which he may read who binds the sheaf. 
Or builds the house, or digs the grave, 
And those wild eyes that watch the wave 

In roarings round the coral reef 

And such, I think, is the only refraction which the 
author of Acts has allowed himself to use. 

We ask, then, is it possible to know the exact 
amount of the refraction in the case of Saul's con- 
version ? The answer to this question appears to be 
not of a direct, but of a relative and comparative 
nature : There is as much refraction in the case 
of the history of Saul's conversion as there is in that 
of Peter's. For the parallelism of Acts is a fact of 
considerable value and importance, and, instead of 
being a ground for discrediting the whole composi- 
tion as a string of imaginary episodes woven by the 
hand of a genius of fiction — a genius which the Chris- 
tian church did not possess in the first two centuries 
— it is a reason for drawing inferences which in con- 
junction with known facts may result in strengthening 
the credibility of the whole. Let us see then what 
the parallelism amounts to : but let us by no means 



attempt to strengthen this credibility if it does not 
strengthen itself. 

Parallelism of the two main portions of the Acts. 

Peter cures the lame man at 

the Gate Beautiful. 
Peter calls down judgment on 

Ananias and Sapphira. 
Peter cures men by his shadow. 

Peter cures the sick, and casts 
out unclean spirits. 

Peter cures Aeneas of the 

Peter raises Dorcas from death. 
Peter's conversion. 
Peter is delivered by an angel 

from prison. 
Peter contends with Simon 


Peter is blamed by 'the cir- 
cumcision.' 1 

Philip's converts require the 
hands of Peter and John. ^ 

Peter is the Apostle to the 
Gentiles originally. 

(i) Paul cures the cripple at iii 10, xiv s. 

(2) Paul brings the judgment v n, xiii s. 

of blindness on Elymas. 

(3) Paul cures men by hand- v 15, xix n. 

kerchiefs, etc. 

(4) Paul cures the sick, and v 16, xix 12. 

casts out unclean 

(5) Paul cures Publius' father 1x32, xxviii 

of fever, etc. ^• 

(6) Paul restores Eutychus. ix 36, xx 7. 

(7) Paul's conversion. x i, ix i. 

(8) Paul and Silas are de- xii 6, xvi 23. 

livered from prison. 

(9) Paul contends with viii 14, xiiis. 

Elymas Magus (see 
R.V. marg.). 

(10) Paul is blamed by the xi i, xv i. 

' circumcision.' 

(11) Apollos' converts require viii 5 f, xix i. 

the hands of Paul to be 
laid on them. 

(12) Paul is the Apostle to the x 45, xi i8, 

Gentiles in results. ''^ '• 

' This parallelism,' says Martineau, ' is too marked 
to be unintentional, too artificial to be historical : 
and, even though all the materials thus balanced 
should be drawn from previous sources (such as the 

' The above list is taken chiefly from a paper by my friend Mr. H. 
Candler in The Christian Reformer, II. 3, September, 1886. 

2 Martineau, Seat of Authority, p. 284, adds the parallels 11 and 12. 


" Preaching " or the " Acts of Peter," and some 
itineraries of Paul), without any mention of con- 
scious fiction, yet the organising principle which 
has disposed them thus is evidently not the simple 
service of fact, but some interest in persons, or 
schools of doctrine, which cannot but weaken our 
confidence in the carefulness of the writer.' Not so, 
I think, if the clue to the understanding of the 
parallelism may be found in the historical fact — as 
I hold it to be — that Luke was the mediator of 
Paul and Peter on a memorable occasion. 

Tke true basis of the parallelism of the Acts. 

Before going further into the examination of this 
statement, it will be useful to quote the LXX version 
of Psalm cxlvi which has already been before us,^ as 
the Alleluia Psalm peculiarly appropriate to Pente- 
cost. The reason and the bearing of this apparently 
irrelevant observation will presently appear. 

CXLVI. Alleluia. Of Haggai and Zachariah. 

1. Praise the Lord, O my soul : 

2. I will praise the Lord with my life ; 

I will sing psalms to my God while I have my being. 

3. Trust not in princes and in sons of men, in whotm there is 

not salvation. 

^See p. 291. 


4. His spirit shall come forth 

And shall convert unto his land : 

In that day shall all their divided thoughts perish. 

5. Blessed is he whose help is the God of Jacob, 

His hope is on the Lord his God : 

6. Who made the heaven and the earth, 

The sea and all things therein : 
Who guardeth truth for ever, 

7. Who doeth judgment for them who are wronged, 

Who giveth foo4 to the hungry. 
The Lord looseth the prisoners, 

8. The Lord uplifteth the fallen : 

The Lord cureth the blind. 
The Lord loveth the righteous. 

9. The Lord guardeth the proselytes, 

Orphan and widow he will take up. 
And the way of sinners he will abolish. 
10. The Lord shall reign for ever, thy God, O Sion, 
Unto generation and generation. 

Now the correspondence of this Psalm with Acts 
i-xii is at least as remarkable as the balance of 
narratives between i-xii and xiii — end. Let us 
take the Psalm verse by verse, and see how Acts 
i-xii comments on each one. 

Title and verse i take us, as we have seen, to the 
building of ' the House of the Great King in glory for 
evermore' (pp. 290 ff.), for Haggai and Zechariah 
were the Prophets who presided at the building of 
Zerubbabel's Temple, to which event the familiar 
passage of the Cornerstone in Ps cxviii refers, and so 
many of St Peter's remarks in Acts ii and iii refer also. 


Verse 2. The hymns and praises of the newly 
founded House of God, the Spiritual Church, have 
been referred to (p. 288 above: Acts iv 24). 

Verse 3. ' The Prince of Life ' is the one object 
of trust, said Peter in Acts iii 15. 'Rulers' sinned 
'in ignorance,' iii 17. The successor of the great 
Ruler Moses is ' a Prophet (Joshua, Jesus) like 
unto him,' iii 22. ' Herod and Pontius Pilate and 
the Gentiles and the people of Israel were gathered 
together against thy Holy Servant (i.e. Prophet) 
Jesus ' in vain, iv 27, and ' in none other is there 
salvation,' iv 12. 

Verse 4. ' The Holy Spirit was poured forth,' 
ii 33, and 'repentance' is preached now, and 
'baptism in the name of Jesus Messiah,' ii 38. 'AH 
that are afar off, as many as the Lord our God 
shall call unto him,' are to share 'the promise' of 
union in Christ, ii 39. 

Verse 5. The God of Jacob helped ' your fathers ' 
when he 'made the covenant with Abraham,' iii 25. 

Verse 6 has been already quoted, as sung by 
the Church, iv 24. See p. 292. 

Verse 7. Judgment for them that are wronged 
is attested by Stephen's vision of the glory of God 
before the persecutors. 'Which of the Prophets 
did not your fathers persecute?' vii 52 ff. 

Verse 7. 'Food to the hungry.' This was ful- 
filled when ' distribution was made unto each, as 
he had need,' iv 35. 


Verse 7. 'Looseth men from prison,' this was 
fulfilled by the release of the Apostles, v 19, and 
the release of Peter, xii 7. 

Verse 8. ' Lifteth up the fallen.' This was 
fulfilled in the case of Saul, ix 4, 6. 

Verse 8. ' Cureth the blind ' in the case of 
Saul, ix 18. 

Verse 8. ' Loveth the righteous' in the case of 
Cornelius, x 4. 

Verse 9. ' Guardeth the proselytes ' in the person 
of the Eunuch, viii 28. 

Verse 9. ' Uplifteth the orphan and widow ' in 
the Hebrew ' widows who had been neglected in 
the daily ministration,' vi 2. 

Verse 9. 'Abolisheth the way of sinners' in 
Ananias and Sapphira, v 5 ff. 

Verse 10. Doxology : compare Philip at Samaria, 
viii 12, and the disciples, iv 26. 

The fulfilment, close as it is throughout every 
line of the Psalm from the title to the Doxology, 
would perhaps not have suggested itself to us but 
for the fact that one verse is quoted, as by the 
Apostles in Acts, and we know that Luke again 
and again has to be content with a selection and 
a sample of large materials, especially when he is 
reporting speeches. He cannot afford to do 
otherwise. The longest speech in the Acts 
occupies about six minutes to read. Does any 
one suppose that he professes to give anything 



but an outline of what was really spoken on that 
and the other occasions ? pven in the case of 
the fulsome orator TertuUus, he has given us a 
brief but admirable sketch of the exordium 
and substance of the oration, and so far from 
the words being imaginary, they strike the un- 
prejudiced reader as being far too life-like to be 
fictitious. On the same principle, we are likely 
to gain some valuable knowledge whenever we 
take the trouble to examine the context of the 
passage from which Luke draws one of his 
quotations. Something more of the same sort lies 
there awaiting notice, and perhaps has lain for 
many centuries without any notice at all. So it 
has in the present case. We conclude then that 
Ps cxlvi 6 is a sample of the entire Psalm, and 
that the rest of it is held by Luke as a Prophet 
to find its fulfilment as well as the sample which 
he is able to quote. 

But if this be so, we have a strong and un- 
mistakeable mark of the predisposition of the 
narrator's mind, which is only confirmed by a 
careful study of the rest of the Acts and the 
Petrine Epistles, each and all. The desire to 
find parallelisms between N.T. occurrences and O.T. 
prophecies will not be content to rest there. It 
will lead him sometimes to seek and discover 
parallelisms between one set of N.T. occurrences 
and another, between the case of the Jew and 


the case of the Gentile, between the Apostle who 
was owned by the Jewish Christians as the head 
of the circumcision and the Apostle who was 
owned by the Gentile Christians as the head of 
the uncircumcision, between events in the life of 
the former and events in the life of the latter. 
In narrating these, he will be prone to exercise 
a selection tending to show correspondence, and 
he has based that selection upon the various 
points which are made so conspicuous in Psalm 
cxlvi. Nor shall we be greatly surprised if he 
carries his correspondence one step further, and 
finds a parallel between a ' sign ' of restoration 
performed by Peter and one performed by the 
Lord Himself,^ just as he has between the circum- 
stances of Stephen's deaths and those of our Lord's, 
between the visit of angels at His birth and at the 
Church's birth, between the baptism of the Lord 
with water and of the Church with fire. 

^ The question of the connexion between the miracle at Joppa where 
Peter uses the words ' Tabitha, arise,' and that in. which our Lord 
said 'Talitha, arise' (Mk v 41, Lk viii 54) is reserved for a future 

2 The false witnesses, the charge of blasphemy, the suffering outside 
the city, the words 'Receive my spirit,' and 'Lay not this sin to 
their charge,' and perhaps more. 


Selection in the Acts based upon a principle. 

At the same time, before we begin to apply the 
fact that paralleHsm exists in the arrangement of 
Acts, it is desirable to add a few remarks upon it. 
First we must bear in mind that it is, as we have 
seen, a parallelism of selection based upon a prin- 
ciple. It is not a parallelism of invention and 
imagination. It may seem easy for a romance writer 
to be consistent in his circumstantial details. But 
any one who will take the trouble to refer to Col. 
Mure's instructive Appendix to his Critical History 
of the Language and Literature of Antient Greece^ 
will see in four pages a succinct account of many 
self-contradictions of Virgil, Milton, Cervantes, 
Walter Scott, and others, as compared with those 
of Homer. That acute and learned author states 
that the few examples which he gives from other 
works than Virgil's (of which he cites nine in the 
Aeneid) are merely such as had incidentally pre- 
sented themselves in the course of his reading. He 
gives them in order that the reader may judge for 
himself the value of Hermann's dogma, so formally 
and authoritatively laid down, 'that no two passages 
of the same work contrary to, or irreconcilable with, 
each other can be by one and the same author.' 

' Vol. i. See also British and Foreign Review, Oct. 1839, vol. ix : 
Westmhtster Review, vol. xlvi, p. 405 : Classical Mttseuin, ii, art. 16. 


The self-contradictions of Virgil, Milton, and Scott 
have not disproved the authenticity of their works. 
But those self-contradictions are numerous, and we 
infer that it must be difficult even for a professed 
author of fiction to be entirely consistent in details. 
How supremely difficult then would it have been 
for an author of fiction to be consistent in details 
if he undertook to compose a double narrative, of 
parallel parts, each consistent with itself, and not 
only possessing verisimilitude but full of details 
such that their truth could and can be tested by 
contemporary evidence. We have seen already (p. 
308) the sort of value which can be placed upon the 
witness, probably eye-witness, of Justin Martyr in 
the middle of the second century. He is no better 
than a wild romance writer upon so simple a matter 
as reading and interpreting an inscription at Rome. 

TAe mention of Theudas by Gamaliel. 

It is far otherwise with Luke. In his dealing in 
Acts with secular historical data connected with the 
Roman provincial and local government he is 
throughout surprisingly accurate. To this statement 
it is probable that one notable exception will be 
taken alike by supporters or opponents of the 
genuineness of Acts — the case of Theudas as men- 
tioned by Gamaliel. 


It has often been asserted by assailants and 
feared by apologists — and Renan has observed that 
the theologian, however liberal, is always uncon- 
sciously an apologist : he aims at defending or 
refuting — that Luke has fallen into an anachronism 
in the speech of Gamaliel referring to the insurrection 
of Theudas, for he places this sometime before the 
appearance of Judas of Galilee in a.d. 6, whereas 
Josephus makes his date under Cuspius Fadus 
about 45 A.D. and therefore many years later than 
Gamaliel's speech in 29-33 A.D. Let us then examine 
this question not from the apologist's standing- 
point, but from the historian's. It is admitted to 
be the most crucial of all questions which affect 
the trustworthiness of Luke as an historian ; and 
if he is not a historian, it will be of small conse- 
quence to us in the present day that he is never- 
theless a Prophet. Prophecy has for its province 
the interpretation and grouping of facts, but it is 
not entitled to report them under false and im- 
possible conditions of time. 

First then we note the observations of three 
leading living authorities on the subject. Schiirer^ 
recognises this as a serious error on the part of 
the author of Acts. Zahn ^ prefers to throw the 
doubt upon Josephus, and more cautiously observes : 

' The Jewish People in the time of Jesus Christ (E.T.), Div. I vol. i 
p. 168, where lists of authorities are given on both sides. 
'^ Einl. N.T. ii 416 (1899). 


" Josephus' Statement is not to be taken on trust 
as a matter of course. He was then [in 45 A.D.^] 
a child of about 8, and his information in that 
portion of the history is extremely inadequate. 
The account of Theudas is a strangely isolated 
appendix to the procuratorship of Fadus described 
in Josephus, Ant. XX i, and separated from it by 
the long episode of XX ii-iv [Parthian affairs]. If 
Josephus is right and Luke wrong, Luke in any 
case cannot have been misled by Josephus into his 
chronological error of no less than half a century. 
It is not to be supposed that Luke inferred the 
priority of Theudas' rising to that of Judas by con- 
fusing the sons of Judas, mentioned by Josephus 
in the next paragraphs (Ant. XX v 2), with their 
father. Josephus mentions, a few lines before the 
sons of Judas, the great famine, which Luke knows Ac xi 28, 
to have occurred under Claudius. But Luke must 
needs have overlooked or have forgotten this, as 
well as the names of the Procurators^ Cuspius 

' Josephus says. Life i : ' I was born in the first year of the reign of 
C. Cfesar. ... I set down the genealogy of my family as I have found 
it described in the public records.' 

^ This seems to be special pleading by Zahn : for Luke only gives an 
epitome of Gamaliel's speech, and Gamaliel was not obliged to give all 
the Roman Procurators' names. Jos. Antt. xx deals with the events 
of no less than 22 years, from Fadus the Procurator to Floras, 45-67 
A.D., in 33 pages of Whiston's translation. Book xix dealt with 34 
years in 46 pages (of which 30 are occupied with Caligula's death and 
Claudius' succession). Book xvill with 32 years in 52 pages. Book 
XVII with 14 years in 50 pages. I am unable to see by what standard 


Fadus, Tiberius Alexander, and Cumanus, and the 
Emperor Claudius in Ant. XX v 1-2. The descrip- 
tions of the events agree only enough to leave it 
probable that Josephus and Luke refer to the same 
fact. [I hope to show that they do not refer to 
the same.] Josephus makes Theudas a juggler 
who gave himself out as a Prophet, and led his 
followers to the Jordan promising to transport them 
over the river by a miracle, but he was taken 
prisoner by a troop of horse, which partly slew and 
partly captured his men : he was then beheaded 
and his head was sent to Jerusalem. This shews 
how much besides the name of Fadus is wanting 
in Luke. The number of his followers, 400, cannot 
have been taken by Luke from Josephus who 
speaks of 'the very large crowd' of them, and the 
words which the two accounts have in common are 
only quite ordinary words." 

Blass suggests that Josephus' text has here been 
interpolated by Christians who were induced by the 
neighbouring reference to the sons of Judas to think 

we may judge that Josephus is ' extremely inadequate,' as Zahn asserts, 
on that portion of his history. A similar complaint is made by Whiston 
on Jos. Antt. XVIII ii : ^ After the death of Herod the Great Josephus is 
very brief in his accounts of Judaea, till near his own time. I suppose 
the reason is that after the large history of Nicolaus of Damascus, 
including the life of Herod, and probably the succession and first 
actions of his sons, he had but few good histories of those times before 
him.' Zahn's complaint ought to be as extensive as Whiston's, but 
then it would also be misplaced; for we should be poorly off without 
Josephus' history from A.D. 4 to A.D. 66. 


that Josephus as well as Luke had previously dealt 
with this Theudas. This solution is wholly unsatis- 
factory ; and so is Blass's further remark in which he 
says, as scores of writers have said before him, that 
Josephus' account of the last days of Herod 
Agrippa T., describing how an owl perched above 
his head by way of an omen, is quietly 
cited by Eusebius (4th century) at some length 
with the alteration of an angel instead of the owl. 
Now Eusebius does indeed omit mention of the 
owl which Josephus had previously mentioned as the 
subject of prophecy long ago made to Agrippa by his 
German fellow-prisoner at Tiberius's court. When 
then after many years Agrippa saw the owl, he 
immediately understood that it was the messenger or 
angel of evil tidings as it had once been the messenger 
or angel of good tidings to him. So says Josephus 
and here Eusebius, who also knew the earlier passage 
of Josephus, simply copies him. But these are 
only recent samples of countless explanations of 
the difficulty of which I now venture to give my 
own solution. Briefly it is this : Josephus' Athronges 
is Luke's Theudas, and Josephus' Theudas is a differ- 
ent person of a widely different date. 

The name Theudas or Theodas is short for the 
Greek name Theodatos or Theodotos, meaning ' God- 
given ' or ' sent by God.' It is just the sort of name 
which a fanatical usurper of power would be likely to 
assume for the encouragement of his followers. So 


much will be readily admitted, nor is the statement 
now made for the first time. 

But there is no reason why ' Theudas ' should not 
be the equivalent by translation of some Hebrew 
name like Nathaniel or Jonathan, which has the same 
meaning, 'Given by El,' 'sent by Jehovah.' 

Josephus on Theudas and Athronges. 

Now there are three separate passages of Josephus 
which fall under consideration for the present pur- 
pose. The first is in the Antiquities, XVII x 4 
under date B.C. 4. Here he says : " Now at this time 
there were ten thousand other disorders in Judaea, 
which were like tumults ; because a great number put 
themselves into a warlike posture, either out of hopes 
■of gain to themselves, or out of enmity to the Jews. 
In particular (i) 2000 of Herod's old soldiers, who 
had been disbanded, got together in Judaea itself, and 
fought against the king's troops. ... (2) There was 
also Judas, son of Ezekias . . . about Sepphoris in 
Galilee. ... (3) There was also Simon, who had 
been a slave of Herod the king. . . . He burned 
down the royal palace at Jericho . . . the royal 
palace also at Amathus, by the river Jordan, was 
burned down by a party of men that were got 
together, as were those belonging to Simon. . . . 
(4) But because Athronges . . . that had been in 


all respects a shepherd only, and was not known 
by anybody ; yet because he was a tall man and 
excelled others in the strength of his hands, he was 
so bold as to set up for a king. . . ." 

The second passage, which alone mentions any 
Theudas, is also in the Antiqiiities, XX v, under date 
45 A.D. : " Now it came to pass while Fadus was 
procurator of Judaea, that a certain magician named 
Theudas persuaded a great part of the people to take 
their effects with them and follow him to the river 
Jordan ; for he told them he was a prophet, and that 
he would by his own command divide the rivers . . . 
and many were deluded. Fadus sent a troop of 
horse against them, who slew many and took many 
alive. . . . They cut off Theudas's head and carried 
it to Jerusalem." 

The third passage is in the Jewish War, II iv. 
under date B.C. 4 : ' At this time there were great 
disturbances in the country in many places ; and the 
opportunity induced a great many to set up for kings. 
And (i) in Idumea 2000 of Herod's veteran soldiers, 
etc. ... (2) In Sepphoris of Galilee one Judas, son 
of Ezekias, etc. ... (3) In Peraea also Simon . . . 
burnt the royal palace at Jericho. . . . The royal 
palaces near Jordan at Betharamathus (i.e. Amathus 
in the other passage) were also burnt down when 
some other rebels came from Peraea. (4) At this time 
it was that a certain shepherd ventured to set him- 
self up for a king ; he was called Athrongaeus, etc' 


It thus appears that Josephus's first reference and 
his third are practically one ; the third is his own 
later abridgment of his first. But that Athrongaeus 
is the name in the third for Athronges in the first, 
there is no divergence in the later account. Whether 
the followers of Athronges were even mainly Jews is 
doubtful from the statements of Josephus : ' they thus 
served both their own countrymen and foreigners . . . 
killing both the Romans and those of the king's 
party, nor did any Jew escape' them : and 'they did 
their own nation also a great deal of mischief 

On the other hand, Josephus's Theudas has no 
connexion whatever with the events of B.C. 4. That 
he was called Theudas at all merely shews that he 
■was a usurper with a sounding name like one of his 
many predecessors, just as a'Mahdi' or a 'Khalifa' 
assumes the name regardless of the failure which has 
attended previous bearers of the same title. Gamaliel 
would naturally use this Greek form of name — even 
if the rebel's own followers did not — if it were more 
commonly known to the authorities, especially when, 
as in the case of Athronges, he had defied all forces 
of order, whether Roman, Herodian, or Jewish. 

Josephus's Theudas differs from Luke's Theudas, 
first, in date : they are fifty years apart. Next in 
following : Luke's had about 400 men, not persons, 
but 7nen ; Josephus's Theudas ' persuaded a great part 
of the people to take their effects with them and 
follow him to the Jordan.' Thirdly in importance. 


Luke's Theudas was important enough (in his 
opinion at least) for Gamaliel to mention him first 
as an instance of a serious danger to the Jewish 
Sanhedrim representing the ancient theocracy 
which was always, but especially then, in the 
absence of a clear successor to the strong-handed 
Herod the Great, liable to peril from a powerful 
usurper of kingly rank and power. Very different 
was the state of Judaea under Fadus, of whom 
Josephus says (xx i) : ' From that time Judaea was 
cleared of robberies by the care and providence of 
Fadus.' A camp-out after a magician or prophet by 
the Jordan in the time of Fadus, which could be 
dispersed by a single troop of horse, was no danger 
at all. 

It only remains for us to infer that while Josephus's 
Theudas has nothing to do with our Theudas, 
Josephus's Athronges is one and the same with 
Luke's Theudas mentioned by Gamaliel. 

Josephus tells us that Athronges had been ' in all 
respects a shepherd only' — probably therefore as a 
half-Arab a stranger to the right pronunciation of 
Greek, using his own patois or dialectic name. This 
uncouth name is not Aramaic, nor Hebrew, nor 
Greek.^ It would be necessary for him to bear 

^ There is no necessity to invoke the science of philology to 
prove a philological connexion between the names Theudas and 
Athronges ; otherwise it would be easy to urge that initial A in proper 
names is sometimes prothetic or prefixed without change of meaning in 
Greek: and that the syllables Aa- and Tai-, both mean 'earth' in 


some more dignified and influential name when he 
usurped Royal power. What name would be more 
appropriate to his own pretensions and his adherents' 
fanaticism than ' Theudas, sent by God ' ? 

Josephus says that Athronges was neither of dis- 
tinguished ancestry nor of great virtue or wealth, but 
of gigantic stature. He had four tall brothers, each 
of whom commanded a troop (Ao'xo?) under him. 
Now these would exactly make Luke's 400 fighting 
men, according to the usual reckoning of 100 men 
to a ' troop.' ^ 

Josephus says that Athronges assumed a diadem, 
and set up a council-chamber, and retained his power 
long. ' He was also called King.' This agrees with 
Luke's expression, ' saying that he was some one.' 
This last is a well-known classical expression for the 
boastful usurpation of high authority. It is not the 
sort of expression that Luke would have put into 
Gamaliel's mouth to denote a mere magician or false 
prophet, such as Josephus represents his Theudas to 
have been. 

Josephus does not describe how Athronges ended 
his career, though he does describe the end of his four 
brothers. Acts says that Theudas was killed, and ,8 

ancient Greek. This would bring the two names as near together 
as THEODAS and THRONDAS. But I think it is possible that 
Tosephus had derived his information from some source vitiated by mis- 
pronunciation. He does not mind reporting the name in two slightly 
different forms, first as Athronges, later as Athrongaeus. 
^Xen. Anab. iii 4 4, iv 8 15. 


of Acts apparently says that he was destroyed by his 
own hand. The end of Athronges was not for some 
time after B.C. 4. But even if it was as late as A.D. 6, 
he would naturally be named by Gamaliel before 
Judas of Galilee, having begun his career so long 
before him. 

The rmiltiUide of instances of healing and of magic. 

Another observation must be made upon the 
parallelism of Acts. We have seen that it results 
from selection based upon a principle, namely, that 
of the fulfilment of the catalogue of wonders and 
paradoxes contained in Psalms cxlvi. Assuming that 
St Paul and St Peter journeyed among the cities of 
Asia and Europe at all, we have to admit that vast 
numbers of incidents of each out of several classes 
occurred to them many times over. Imprisonment 
or durance more or less severe could not have 
occurred only once to each. Whoever, then, was 
the first collector of materials of their histories must 
have made a selection of the accounts of their 
imprisonments. Again, magicians swarmed in every 
city and town, as anyone conversant with the history 
of 50 to 200 A.D. is aware. At a place like Antioch 
they were numbered not by scores, but by hundreds. 
Where every act and stage of human life passed 
under a presiding deity, not merely the Lucina and 


Juno, but the Scribunda and the Statina and the 
Epona, the Hygieia and the Peninus and the 
Mephitis, it must have been so : the inferior deities 
must have had their human satellites, as the Olympic 
gods their priests and mediums.^ Consequently 
everywhere their minions would confront the 
Apostles, and the first biographer would have to 
select the occurrences worth recording. Thirdly, 
works of healing did, as the present writer believes, 
attend the first preaching of the Gospel ; at least 
the belief that they did so was universal, not only 

Acivi6. among the Christians, but among the Jews and 
among the heathens. The latter must have believed 
that their own magicians could produce faith-healing: 
otherwise how did these magicians thrive and mul- 
tiply ? Science was then confined within very narrow 
and select circles. The conception of the human 
frame as subject to any physical law whatever, 
except that of death, was barely existent ; and 
whether death was indeed a law for all is a question 
that was then doubtful. For instance, it is certain 
that the belief that Nero had risen, or would rise 
again, began to prevail immediately after his death.^ 
Nero, of all people ! The belief, therefore, in 
Christian miracles of healing in the first century 

RomxviB. is not surprising. St Paul himself treats them 

2 Cor xii 12, 

1 Tert. de Anima, 39. See Friedlander, Civilisation, etc. (tr. Vogel), 
livre xi. 

^See The Chnstian Prophets, p. 217. 


rather as a matter of course among the signs of 
his Apostleship, which he names with the deepest 

If now we refer to the list of twelve parallelisms 
between Peter and Paul given above, we shall find 
that one refers to release from prison, five refer to 
cases of healing, and one to magic. Let us not 
suppose by any means that this clears away all 
diflficulty from those cases. But while each several 
account still requires to be considered on its merits, 
it is perhaps fair to say that we are now in a 
position to disarm the hasty conclusion that, because 
an arrangement is artificial, therefore the narratives 
arranged are untrustworthy. We may now return 
to the thread of Acts by examining the conversion 
of Peter in comparison with the conversion of Paul, 
in order to see what light is thrown upon the latter 
narrative by the former. 

The Conversion of Peter. 

The conversion of Peter is not a term of which 
custom has sanctioned the use. Yet it is one which 
possesses scriptural authority more than the customary 
term 'the conversion of Saul.' For Christ's own 
words are, as reported by Luke alone : ' And do thou, Lk xvii 32. 
when once' {i.e. one day it shall come to pass so) 
'thou hast converted' {kin(jrpe^a<s intransitive), 



'stablish thy brethren.' So persistently does our 

current terminology run in its grooves, that we have 

not the current term ' conversion ' as applied to Peter. 

It is reasonable to suppose that Luke, when he 

penned these words in his Gospel, was acquainted 

with the history of Peter's conversion which he 

was about to record in Acts. For if he obtained 

from Peter the greater part of the material used in 

Acts i-xii, it is certain that he would obtain from 

him also the materials for most of his Gospel, at 

least for the passages of it which concern Peter. 

And the results of the examination conducted in 

these pages hitherto tend to shew clearly that Luke 

was in a position to draw his materials from Peter. 

Now the account of Peter's conversion is the 

Acx lo. account of an ecstasy beyond all doubt, and it follows 

immediately on the account of Paul's conversion. 

No sooner has Saul been conducted by the brethren 

out of danger's reach from the Hellenists of Jerusalem 

Ac in 30. (by night, as ^ records) to Caesarea and then by 

sea to Tarsus, than the doings of Peter in the villages 

and towns of the Shefelah come before us, and soon 

Acxc). his particular vision at Joppa. Peter was fasting and 

very hungry, while he had gone to prayer about 

noon upon the housetop. Now the ecstatic state 

was usually preceded, and partly produced, by fasting. 

Prayer in the Temple preceded Saul's ecstasy and 

Ac.vxiii?. vision, fasting being unmentioned. A fast of three 

2 Cor xii I f, 

cfxi27. days was meant to have preceded the important 


revelation which, according to the Muratorian Canon, 
actually occurred on the first night of the three and 
led to the acceptance and publication ^ of the Fourth 
Gospel. A fast preceded the revelation of the Holy 
Spirit to the Prophets at Antioch, that Barnabas and Acxiiia. 
Saul were called to a definite work. Another fast/* 3-. 

Ac xiv 2^. 

with prayer preceded their ordination. Fasting and 
prayer accompanied the ordination of elders in 
Pisidia. The hunger of Peter at his conversion is 
not called a fast ; yet the ' ecstasy ' followed. The 
recovery of Saul's sight was preceded by a three 
days' fast. The vision of Cornelius is not called an 
ecstasy. The vision of Ananias is not called an 
ecstasy. But both Cornelius and Ananias were Ac x 1,22. 
' devout men,' ' God-fearing,' ' righteous,' very much Lk h 25 f. 
like Simeon, who had received a revelation, and like 
Anna, the Prophetess, who worshipped God te/zV/^ Lk u 37. 
fastings and supplications night and day. Simeon 
and Anna were acknowledged instances of the 
prophetic gift. Blass rightly observes that the term 
•righteous' implies the fulfilment of the precepts of 
God in the Jewish sense, and we can hardly doubt 
that fasting accompanied the almsgiving yvhich is 
specified among the merits of Cornelius. 

We may then arrange the data in the following 
conspectus, which exhibits the parallelism between 
the cases of St Peter, and other Prophets in Acts, 
and St Paul. It seems to shew that Cornelius was 

1 See The Christian Prophets, pp. 240-246. 



qualified to belong to the prophetic order in all 
save actual admission, but it does not follow that 
he was actually a Prophet : 

Ac X lo ff, 

Ac X 2, 22, 

Fasting (Prayer). 
Peter at Joppa 

Peter at Joppa 

3°, 35 ; xi (Ananias) 


Prophets at Antioch 

Ac xiii 2 f. 
Ac xiv 23. 
Ac ix z8. 
Ac xxii 17, 

Prophets in Pisidia 
Saul's recovery 
(Saul in the Temple) 

Vision and Hearing. 

Peter at Joppa 



Prophets at Antioch 

Saul's blindness 
Saul in the Temple Saul in the Temple 

The blank spaces in this conspectus mark the 
absence of distinct statements by the historian. But 
it is too much to expect that he should record the 
statement ' ecstasy here ' on every occasion when it 
was present. If he were a Prophet writing in the 
days of Prophecy — and to this we shall refer later, 
p. 362 — it would be left to the reader to understand 
the cause of the phenomena narrated, without the 
description in every case of the condition which 
supervened upon fasting and issued in the revelation 
by vision and hearing. Although only in one case 
have we the three stages definitely recorded, yet we 
seem to be left with the alternatives either to supply 
the other stages uniformly in the absence of direct 
statement, or to admit the presence of a very much 
greater difficulty, that we are in the midst of a 
chaos of coincidences unrelated to each other. If 
the phenomena described are related to one another 



as proceeding from the same cause, then we have 
the explanation recognised by St Paul himself in 
the ordered arrangement prescribed by him in i Cor 
xiv 24 ff., together with the customary circumstances 
of homage done to the Prophet, as Cornelius did it to iCorxiv^; 
St Peter, and as John the Elder did it to 'the angel Acx^sf. 
who shewed him these things,' with the same cus- Ap xxii 8. 
tomary reply in each case : ' See thou do it not : I 
am thy fellow-servant,' or : ' Arise, I also am a man.' 
Those who prefer the alternative of coincidences will 
incur the peril of shutting their eyes to well-attested 
tokens of a Divine law, which was in active operation 
once, and may be so again. 

It may, indeed, be admitted that, in the case 
of Saul's blindness and recovery, the specific state- 
ments in Acts, by themselves, hardly place it on the 
same level with the other cases. Still, we are 
confronted with the difficulty, on the one side, that 
his recovery was preceded by a three days' fast, ac ix 9. 
though it is not said to have been attended with 
ecstasy and vision, while his blindness was accom- 
panied with vision, though it is indeed not said to 
have followed from ecstasy produced by fasting. 
On the other side, we have a sense that both the 
recovery and the blindness would be more easily 
related to each other if both were related to a state of 
ecstasy intervening. It needs but little imagination 
to think that at the end of a journey of some days 
under a Syrian sun at midday, the traveller wasAcxxvii3. 


likely to be fatigued and hungry, postponing food 
and refreshment to the goal which was so near! 
'You cross,' says Dr. Adam Smith.^ 'the plateau 
of Sahra-ed-Dimas, six shadeless miles that stretch 
themselves, with the elasticity of all Syrian plains 
in haze, till you almost fancy you are upon some 
enchanted ground rolling out with you as you travel. 
But at last the road begins to sink, and you come 
with it into a deep rut, into which all the heat and 
glare of the broad miles behind seems to be com- 
pressed. The air is still, the rocks blistered, the road 
deep in dust . .' So there is nothing violent in 
supposing that Saul was hungry, and that, if so, he 
was predisposed to the state of Ecstasy, as Peter 
was when he waited for his midday meal at Joppa. 
If the hunger of the journey produced, humanly 
speaking, an Ecstasy of unusual character and dura- 
tion, resulting in a chronic injury to the eyesight, 
such as St Paul seems to refer to in his Epistle to 
the Galatians, and intensified by the three days' fast 
preceding his recover}-, then we may say that Luke's 
narrative of the occurrence is brought more within 
the bounds of credibility than if it were left in its 
naked independence of all phenomena which are in 
kind similar to its own. 

Lastly, the juxtaposition of the two conversions 
of Peter and Paul in the consecutive narrative of 
Acts invites us to infer, from the certain phenomena 

1 The Historical Geography of the Holy Land, ch. xxx. 


of Ecstasy in the former, the presence of similar 
results from causes not dissimilar in the latter. 
Saul's outward sense of sight may have sustained 
injury from the occurrence on the road to Damascus, 
but his inner sense was henceforward quickened for 
the ' seeing of visions,' such as were promised to the 
young men of whom Joel prophesied. Not only in the ac xvi 9. 

Ac xviii g. 

Temple at Jerusalem, but at Troas, at Corinth, and Ac xxvii 23, 

on board the Alexandrine vessel bound for Italy, 

he was destined to receive by this faculty many a 

premonition and encouragement from God, whose 

he was and whom he served. And there were occa- ac xviii 21/3. 

Ac xix 1 /3. 

sions, such as that at Ephesus, in the course of the ^c xx 3 ^. 
' third missionary journey,' when his own definite 
plan is known by the writer of the Acts to have 
been overruled and his movements altered by words 
' said to him,' by the inner voice of the Spirit. 


The Release of Peter from Prison. 

We now come to an event in Acts xii which is beset 
with some difficulty. The narrative as it stands is 
dead. It is incapable of treatment for purposes of 
teaching and preaching and understanding. Histori- 
cally it is useless, ethically it is injurious. It is 
useless, because it cannot be put in relation to 'the 
services of angels and men ordained and constituted 
in a wonderful order ' ; for the order in which the 
angel in question here proceeds is an order of its 
own kind, capable neither of being an object of faith 
nor yet of knowledge, and wholly removed from the 
angels' sphere with which we are acquainted. An 
angel as the object of faith does not smite a man 
upon the side, and instruct him by three separate 
commands to rise quickly, and deliberately to gird 
himself and put on his sandals and throw his cloak 
around him. Angels only command our faith when 
they, unlike a deus ex machina in a Greek play, have 


to do with higher concerns than the adjustment of 
one's clothing. But the account is injurious because 
it represents Peter's life as being saved only at the 
expense of the lives of the guards, who, possibly to 
the number of only two, but probably to the number 
of sixteen, were ruthlessly put to death by Herod. 
Thus the account is not one that can be regarded, as 
it stands, with even equanimity by any thoughtful 
disciple of Him who came to seek and to save that 
which was lost, and to give His life a ransom for 

Now upon the theory that Acts was composed in 
the second century, plenty of time is allowed for the 
growth of legendary matter concerning his actions, 
and the present narrative might be included as a 
legend. Much that is historical would no doubt be 
included along with it. But no such indulgence is 
allowed to the view which is being propounded in 
these pages. We are not dealing with a long vista 
of St Peter's followers, which looked back to him 
through a distance of time which lent enchantment to 
their view. Nor does it seem necessary with Blass to Ac xH 12. 
suppose that this is a narrative which Luke owed 
to John Mark, to whose mother Mary's house Peter 
repaired directly after his release. The present 
writer ventures to think that Peter himself was the 
authority for this, as for the other accounts in which 
he is concerned in the first portion of Acts. If so, we 
have a description from the lips of the chief actor in 


the scene, and yet it is not to be taken as it stands. 
The situation appears to be difficult, but it is not so 
difficult as the theory of the second-century artist 
along with all its consequences and the inferences 
from it, especially when it is confronted with the 
results hitherto obtained. Nor is it so difficult as the 
plan of leaving the account as it stands, if we may 
judge from the habit, which authors reputed orthodox 
appear to have, pf passing it by on the other side. 
This is nothing else but a silent implication that it is 
legendary and unhistorical. It is altogether fairer 
to face the difficulty and see what light the history 
throws upon the book as a whole. 

Luke has written with his wonted candour, the 
same candour which he shews in the discrepancies 
of Stephen's speech with the O.T., and in the 
three accounts of Paul's conversion. For he tells us 
Ac xii 9. that Peter himself ' wist not that it was true which 
was done by the angel, but thought he .saw a vision.' 
This initial uncertainty on Peter's part need not 
surprise us, although we know that he had seen a 
Ac X 10, xi 5. remarkable vision before, and that ecstatic visions 
Acxiie. were not uncommon occurrences with him, for the 
simple reason that he had been asleep, and conse- 
quently there were no less than four solutions of the 
perplexity open to him : either what he saw was a 
reality, or it was an angelic appearance, or it was a 
dream, or it was seen in ecstasy. He eventually 
rejected the first explanation and the two last, and 


espoused the second, but it appears at first sight as 
if he still had some inclination in favour of the 
fourth. A strange thing is that there is an expres- 
sion used by Luke which would have exactly suited 
with the said fourth solution, for he says, ' When Ac xii n. 
Peter came to himself (ev eavrw yevofxevoi)' Now this 
expression is very often used as the exact correlative 
of Ecstasy {eKcrT>jvai, e^w eavTov yevea-Qai), yet of 
course the condition which thus passed from him 
was no Ecstasy, as the event proved, for Ecstasy 
never transported the body from one place to 
another. But Blass is quite right in saying that 
this is only one more instance of Luke's good 
classical scholarship,^ because he uses the term to 
mean ' became his own master,' ' was free.' This is 
the right meaning of the words here. The R.V. is 
therefore not correct in translating 'came to himself,' 
and the fourth explanation receives no support from 
the narrative of Acts. But was Peter's eventual 
interpretation correct .? We remember that the man Genx.xxii! 
who wrestled with Jacob was also an angel. hos xii 4. 

More Light from the Western Recension. 

The details of the story are very precise and 
graphic, and the Western Recension {fi) provides us 
with many that are not found in R.V. Thus in verse 
3 we are told what it was on the part of Herod 

'See pp. 279 n, 367, and The Christian Prophets, p. 158. 


which 'pleased the Jews': it was ^ his attack upon 
the faithful! In verse 5 we have a most important 
fact — I cannot think it anything but a fact — Peter 
was kept in the prison ' by the king's guard, and 
much prayer was being made in earnestness for him 
from the Church to God.' In verse 7 the angel 
instead of smiting Peter nudged him on the side. 
In verse 10 they went out and stepped down the seven 
steps and went on through one street. This reference 
to the seven steps is one that it is difficult to believe 
that a mere transcriber invented, as Dr. Rendel 
Harris^ remarks, and he adds: 'The detail which 
is given (in /3) in the visit of Peter to Cornelius, that 
when they came near to Caesarea one of the slaves 
ran forward to announce Peter's approach, and that 
Cornelius sprang forward to greet him, is as lifelike 
as anything we could wish, and agrees with the 
statement that Cornelius had sent two slaves along 
with a devout soldier.' May we not also say that it 
is difficult to believe that the statement is anything 
else but that of an eye-witness, Peter, as well as that 
of the author, Luke.? The detail which Luke, in 
making his own revision, — such at least is Blass's 
view, which the present writer is more inclined to 
follow — thought too trivial to be worth perpetuating, 
is to us of great value as bearing the stamp of simple 
and lifelike truth. 

^ Four Lectures on the Western Text, 1894, p. 63. 


The Soldiers of Palestine. 

Nor is the remark that Peter was watched by 
the kings guard of less value. What can we dis- 
cover about the ' men of war ' of Agrippa I ? 
Schurer, in dealing generally with the military 
arrangements of the Herodian times, concludes 
that " in Judea, down to the time of Vespasian, 
there were no legionaries at all, but only auxiliary 
troops and, indeed, mostly such as had been 
raised in the country itself The honour and 
burden of this levy lay only on the non-Jewish 
inhabitants of Palestine. The Jews were exempted 
from military service . . . For the period A.D. 6-41 
we are without any direct information about the 
troops stationed in Judea. But it is highly probable 
that the Sebastians, i.e. the soldiers drafted in 
the region of Sebaste or Samaria, whom we meet 
with subsequently, constituted even then a con- 
siderable portion of the garrison. In the struggles 
which followed the death of Herod in B.C. 4, the 
best equipped part of the troops of Herod fought 
on the side of the Romans, namely the three 
thousand men of Sebaste. . . . The troops thus 
proved would be undoubtedly retained by Archelaus, 
and it is highly probable that, after his deposition 
in A.D. 6, they would be taken over by the Romans, 
then [Schurer means their successors as a half- 


legion, if any, a long generation afterwards] from 
41 to 44 by Agrippa, and after his death again by 
the Romans. The following also speaks in favour 
of this supposition. At the death of Agrippa in 
44, the troops of the king stationed in Caesarea, 
which were men of Caesarea and Sebaste (Samaria), 
gave expression in a very unseemly manner to 
their joy at the death of the ruler that had shown 
himself friendly to the Jews." ^ 

'Schlirer adds : " It is remarkable that in Caesarea about A.D. 40 an 
'Italian band' (cohort, say 500 men) should have been stationed 
(Acts xi), by which probably a cohort of Roman citizens of Italy is to 
be understood. Such a band would naturally not have served in 
Caesarea A.D. 41-44 under the Jewish king Agrippa. [Why not? 
Agrippa was to all intents and purposes a Roman, the intimate friend 
of Caesar and his household. ] But even in reference to a later period, 
it is not probable, after ihe above-made investigations. The story of 
Cornelius lies therefore in this respect under suspicion, the circum- 
stances of a later period having bfeen transferred back to an earlier 
period.'' It should however be added that a possible inaccurracy of 
Luke as to the name of Cornelius's cohort does not vitiate the entire 
story in which the false name occurs. But Schtirer's admission above, 
as to the want of direct information about the troops stationed in Judaea 
between a.d. 6 and 41 (which includes the time of Cornelius being at 
Caesarea), is quite enough to give us pause in concluding that Luke was 
there inaccurate. "The provinces," says Schurer elsewhere (p. 51) 
"were treated in very diverse ways and varying measure in the matter 
of military service." I do not follow Schurer in the above remarks 
about Cornelius. Agrippa I.'s long-standing intimacy with the Caesars' 
court— where it was rightly surmised that every leading Herod was to 
the C.iesars a key to the safety of all the East — is enough to explain his 
position in Palestine. Any reader of Joseplms will see how natural it 
was for him to be attended by an Italian cohort as a sort of body-guard, 
on whose loyalty he could count and who would set the tone to the doubt- 
ful and miscellaneous character of his other troops. And yet there is 
no reason why Cornelius, a centurion of this cohort, should not also 


We have then this situation : Herod Agrippa I. 
and 'the Jews' on the one side playing into each 
other's hands, and the troops, provincials of Samaria 
and Caesarea, not Jews, disliking Herod and the 
Jews, on the other; therefore these latter were 
likely to be cold, as Thucydides would say, in 
proceeding to a work of hot blood. Agrippa I. is 
evidently a favourite of Josephus, who however 
admits that he was detested by his soldiers. He 
says : 1 ' When it was known that Agrippa was 
departed this life (a.d. 44), the inhabitants of 
Caesarea and Sebaste forgot the kindness which 
he had bestowed on them, and acted the part of 
the bitterest enemies ; for they cast reproaches upon 
the deceased that are not fit to be spoken of — and 
so many of them as were then soldiers, which were 
a great number, went to his house and . . did 
things too indecent to be related. . . . These were 
the very men that became the source of very great 

have been a proselyte, very probably since his years spent at Rome, and 
now 'attested by the whole nation of the Jews.' This cohort was 
stationed at Caesarea from 38-39 A.D., being 'the second year of Caius 
Caesar ' when ' Agrippa by the emperor's permission came into his own 
country, and appeared to them unexpectedly as a king . . . marching 
among the multitude with the usual ensigns of royal authority.' This 
pomp aroused Herodias' jealousy, which made Caius angry, and he 
banished Antipas with her, and gave his country to Agrippa. (Jos. 
Antt. XVIII vi end and vii). We may thus fix the date of Peter's 
'Conversion' Acts x as 39-40 A.D. Caesarea, Sebaste, Joppa, and 
Jerusalem had paid tribute to Archelaus and were thus the head- 
quarters of the Herodian power (Jos. Antt. XVII xi 4). 

' Antt. XIX ix. 



calamities to the Jews in after times, and sowed the 
seeds of the war that began under Florus ' (A.D. 66). 
That some of these troops would be slack in 
watching their prisoners is all the more likely if 
they knew that the latter were hated by the 
Jewish authorities, for these and not the common 

Ac V 13. people were afraid of the Apostles : ' the people 
magnified them.' In fact so popular before this 
time had the Apostles become, that some kind 
friend had speedily ensured their release when 

Ac V 18. the Sadducees had put them in ward. Though 
a pretty story could be made by supposing that 

Ac X 7. one of Cornelius's ' devout soldiers ' had access 
or belonged to the four quaternions who guarded 
Peter, the supposition is unnecessary. Slackness- 
casual on the part of some, but intentional on 
the part of others — would account for the soldiers 
allowing between them some favoured individual, 
perhaps a centurion, to enter the prison and set 
Peter free. The further statement that he lost 
little time after his release in ' departing unto 
another place,' while the unhappy guards paid 
forfeit with their heads, is only too closely similar 
to the legendary occasion of the Quo vadis, Domine t 
' Lord, whither goest thou ? ' on which the Saviour 
addressed him outside the walls of Rome with the 
answer, 'I go to Rome to be crucified for thee,' and 
by His self-denying offer brought the timid Apostle 
to a due sense of his conduct and his duty. 


The above explanation of the incident is one that 
saves the candour of St Luke at the expense of the 
courage of St Peter, but it must be allowed that 
the latter had failed on more than one occasion 
before, and if the Quo Vadis legend has any basis 
at all — and it may have some — it was destined to 
be afterwards on the point of failing him again. 
His greatest admirers cannot pretend that courage 
was his strong point. The expense, therefore, in 
the present case is not so very great. Peter being 
deficient in courage was somewhat too eager to 
accept his human deliverer and friend as an angel 
of God. The word angel means simply messenger, 
and never did any angel utter more entirely human 
instructions. When Peter reported the story to 
Luke, the latter recorded it as an instance of fulfil- 
ment of Ps cxlvi, ' The Lord looseth men out of 
prison,' but in doing so he is not careful to shew 
the interpretation which he placed upon the occur- 
rences himself, and he has been entirely impressed 
with the imaginary complexion put by Peter on 
his own drowsy experiences.^ The incident I take 
as a whole to be real and historical, not angelic 

1 1 can see but one expression which has even the appearance of con- 
flicting with the above explanation. ' The iron gate opened to them 
(automatically) of its own accord.' I imagine that nothing more is 
meant by this than ' without effort.' Plutarch mentions an Automatia, 
the goddess of chance. See Liddell and Scott. The iron gate had 
been left open by the messenger of deliverance when he entered the 


and legendary, in spite of the Petrine complexion 
of some of the details, which must needs have been 
seen in the light of the words : ' He brought them 

Ps cvii 14. out of darkness and the shadow of death, and brake 
their bonds in sunder.' And, finally, if we test the 
historian's part in the narrative by his own words 
in the preface to the Gospel, where he says that 

Lkis- he has 'followed along with all things accurately,' 
and writes ' in order,' we shall not, I think, consider 
that he falls short of his own standard. This 
matter was one of those ' which had been fulfilled 
among them, even as one of the eye-witnesses 
delivered it unto them.' Luke now followed along 
with it, but it would be unreasonable to argue that 
this somewhat general term of his implied his 
intention to criticise, while he reported, the fulfil- 

Traces of the whereabouts of the writer of Acts 
at Antioch. 

A comparison of the readings of /3 with those of 
the accepted version of Acts shews that in most 
cases the author has merely revised his first draft 
and pruned away unnecessary words. Such, at 
least, is the impression produced upon the reader 
of to-day. It would be safe to say that this is true 
of four-fifths of the matter in question. The chief 


interest, of course, after this result has been ascer- 
tained, gathers round the remaining fifth, of which 
some portions only can be considered in the present 
work. One of the most important variations is that 
which occurs in the description of the church at 
Antioch. ' And in those days there came down Ac xi 27. 
Prophets from Jerusalem to Antioch : and there was 
much rejoicing. And when we were gathered together 
one of them named Agabus said, signifying by the 
spirit . . .' Here we have an addition to the We- 
document, so-called. But it is far away from the 
other parts of the We-document, which is commonly 
said to commence at xvi 10, in connexion with the 
first visit to Philippi, where it breaks off soon after 
it has commenced, only to begin again at Philippi 
towards the end of 'the third journey,' continuing 
to xxi 18, and resuming again with the voyage to 
Rome. The questionable case of xiv 22 has been 
discussed above. 

The presence of this We-passage appears to upset Ac xi 27. 
the theory of a We-document altogether — that is to 
say, it requires that instead of one we must suppose 
at least two We-documents, unless this passage can 
be shewn to be connected with the other and larger 
document. But what has it in common with it .? 
Leaving aside the questionable case of the We 
where Barnabas and Paul are together in Pisidia, 
which has been already considered, we find that 
the We-document extends to narratives connected 


with the journeys from Troas to Philippi, from 
Philippi past Asia Minor to Jerusalem, from 
Caesarea to Rome. Antioch has had no part in it. 
Ramsay has said ^ that as the Travel-document it 
interprets itself '' as a simple, straightforward, his- 
torical testimony . . . with perfect ease, and that it 
confirms and completes our knowledge of the 
country acquired from other sources in a way 
which proves its ultimate origin from a person 
acquainted with the actual circumstances." Harnack^ 
says it is ' the most trustworthy portion of the 
history ' of the Acts. But here is another We- 
document or an extract from it. And what an 
extract! 'When we were gathered together.' Blass 
is right when he observes : ' A most valuable testi- 
mony, by which the author shews that he was a 
man of Antioch ' : or rather let us say, ' by which 
he shews that he was then at Antioch, and 
identified himself with the Church there, in con- 
trast with the Prophets that came down with 
Agabus from Jerusalem whom he mentions as 
them' There is no sign at present of other 
Antiochene We-documents, but more traces of the 
Western Recension (^8) have yet to be discovered, 
as we hope. And if these should include more 
first persons plural in the narrative, the more will 
this We-document grow and multiply upon us. 

^ The Church in the Roman Empire, p 3 (1893). 

^ Chron. 669. See The Christian Prophets, p 248 n. 


But it is indeed hard to believe that the Author 
here resorted to a We-document at all. 'Travel- 
document/ as Ramsay calls it, is not a term that 
applies in this passage, for the travels of St Paul 1 
have not begun, and his mission with Barnabas to 
Jerusalem, consequent on Agabus' present visit to 
Antioch, can hardly be called a Missionary journey. 
If we have a document here at all, it must be rather 
an archive of the Church at Antioch. But would an 
archive or chronicle or record of conference contain 
such a graphic description of the feeling of the 
moment as ' There was great rejoicing : and when we 
were gathered together one of them named Agabus 
said, signifying it by the Spirit'.? Assuredly not. • 
The description bears the stamp of an eye-witness 
relating in his own language what he remembered of 
a certain red-letter day of long ago. 

But further, it seems that the Author was not 
careful to preserve the reference to We, any more 
than the reference to the rejoicing. He might well 
have omitted the latter and yet allowed the We to 
stand : or he might have done the reverse. But for 
the sake of brevity if for no other reason he has 
removed from this verse about one line. If he used 

' Ramsay, The Church in R.E., p. 8, 1893, says ' The original 
document was composed under St Paul's own influence, for only he was 
present on all the occasions which are described with conspicuous 
vividness.' Of the present scene at Antioch, the description though 
brief is extremely vivid. The We-author was there, whether Saul was 
or not, on that day. 


a document, was it worth his while to consult and 
use it, only to expunge again what he had taken 
from it ? I cannot think so. 

At any rate it is clear that this is a specially 
interesting passage because it presents us with a 
combination of the use of We with a variation 
between the two recensions. Can this combination 
be purely accidental ? Is it not part of the nature 
of the Acts ? Is it not a clue to the understanding 
of the origin and textual phenomena of the book.' 
I am convinced that it is, and that no explanation 
of the one element can be satisfactory which does 
not throw light upon the other. We have not 
indeed succeeded hitherto in interpreting the true 
bearings of the /3 recension ; but we must continue 
to test any and every theory of it by the application 
of its representative readings. The following theories, 
which are not all mutually exclusive, appear to be 
held at present : 

(i) The /3 variations are mere interpolations by 
Montanists in the second century. (Harris, 

{2) The /3 variations are translations from a Latin 
version of Acts. 

(3) The /3 variations are translations from a 

Syriac version of Acts. 

(4) The j8 variations belong to a draft dating 

earlier than 70 A.D., while the a text dates 
from later than 70. 


(5) The fi variations belong to a recension for 

Jews, a being for Romans and Gentiles. 

(6) The 8 draft is earlier and more diffuse, while 

a is a later abridgment by the author 
(Blass). To these I now venture to add a 
theory which carries (6) further. 

(7) The ^ draft is more prophetic as well as 

earlier, and was afterwards modified — by 

Luke, I think — into a. 
I hold that Luke was still a Prophet as much as 
ever, when he wrote a, but he saw that besides a 
redundancy of language which appears in /3 — though 
some of this may be only apparent — it admitted 
the reader to the esoteric nature of the Apostles' 
movements rather more than was necessary, or 
than was desirable for a reader who was not a 
Prophet himself As the congregations grew and 
multiplied, he saw that it was not necessary for 
every orally-instructed Christian to enter into the 
multifarious details of waves of sentiment ('much 
rejoicing') and changes of plan and resolution, and 
even some particulars of prophetic fulfilment, which, 
however intensely convincing at the time of their 
discovery, were not of equal permanent importance 
for all readers or hearers of Acts. The main out- 
lines of the work were not modified. The grand 
facts were untouched. No new principle was 
introduced. The second draft continues the same 
mental operations which acted in the production of 


the first, namely, a selection and compression and 
proportioned description {Si-oyria-i?) of the matters 
treated by Luke under the guidance of the prophetic 
Spirit. Still I must avow some amount of doubt as 
to whether the hand which corrected ,8 into a is not 
the same hand which suppressed Part III. of Acts, 
and which is another than Luke's (p. 374). 

If it appear to some to be unwarranted to pro- 
pound this theory without supporting it by the 
detailed evidence of /3, I can but reply that after 
so much has been written in recent times on this 
subject by Dr. Rendel Harris and others, the 
student can apply the materials already at his 
disposal, e.g. in Dr. Harris's Study of Codex Bezae 
mentioned above, in order to test the present theory. 
It may even be called a modification of his, in so 
far as the Montanists, as I have tried to shew in 
The Christian Prophets, were themselves but a 
modification, not indeed in a healthy direction, of 
the Christian Prophets of St. Luke's time, and hence 
it results that many supposed traces of Montanism 
are simply traces of Christian prophecy. But in 
no sense do I consider that ^ readings are inter- 
polations by any one, not even by the author himself. 
However, to return to Acts xi. 27/3. If, as 
seems to the present writer, it disposes of the idea 
of a Travel-document or We-document, and brings 
us to the writer's own self again, proving that the 
author of We is the author of Acts himself, and 


that instead of consulting a document, he only con- 
sulted the tablets of his own memory, we are at 
any rate brought back to the companion of St 
Paul. And further, if this companion knows as 
much about Silas as he does about St Paul, we 
have so much confirmation of the view that Silas 
is the author. 

Another trace of the writer at Antioch. 

Now we find that he has very intimate knowledge 
of Silas. There is a remarkable variation in xv 34, 
' But it seemed good to Silas to remain there.' 
Westcott and Hort followed by R.V. omit the 
verse. But R.V. margin says ' Some a.ncient 
authorities insert it with variations.' What had 
occurred is this : the decree of the Council of 
Jerusalem had been transmitted by the hands of 
Paul and Barnabas, and Jude and Silas, to the 
Gentile Christians of Antioch and Syria and Cilicia. 
After being dismissed solemnly they came down to 
Antioch, summoned the body of the Church and 
delivered the Epistle. The churchmen of Antioch 
read it aloud and rejoiced at the gentle exhortation 
which presented a contrast to the stern command 
that it might have been. Judas too and Silas 
themselves, being Prophets, exhorted the brethren 
at length and confirmed them. 


Christian Prophets full of the Holy Spirit 

Here there is a pause, and we may take this 
opportunity to remark that a very important addition 
is made by /3 to the description of Judas and Silas, 
that they were 'full of the Holy Spirit' Now just 
before, at the end of the conciliar decree, ^ adds 
the words 'borne by (ei/) the Holy Spirit.' It will 
be said perhaps that here is proof that Silas was 
not Luke, for he could never have written this 
about himself: he was too modest! But the 

2 Pet 121. answer is simple enough. As in 2 Peter, where he 
is speaking of the O.T. Prophets, he has used this 
very expression, insisting that ancient prophecy 
was uftered direct from God by men borne by {liro) 
the Holy Spirit, so in his later days he likewise 
maintained that the interpretation of prophecy 
should rest with the Christian Prophets only. This 
Petrine passage could not possibly have been written 
late in the second century when the Christian 
Prophets had ceased to exist, and the present writer 
has shewn elsewhere that the verse was exactly one 
which by reason of its apparent danger to Church 
order would tend, and in fact it led, to the sup- 
pression of the whole Epistle completely in the 
Eastern half of the Church, though happily it was 
somehow preserved in the West. The Montanists 

= Pet i fzi. would naturally seize upon the text as justifying 


their laxer usage of uttering Prophecy during the 
Ecstasy itself ; whereas Luke wrote the words some- 
what generally perhaps, but only because it never, 
of course, occurred to him that such a trouble as 
Montanism would arise in the future. Here then 
the N.T. Prophets, Judas and Silas, are described 
in almost identical language with that which is 
used of O.T. Prophets in 2 Peter ; for no one will 
say that there is any essential difference between 
the two prepositions applied to the substantive, or 
that there is much difference between 'full of and 
'borne by' which immediately precedes it. 

It is likely enough that the expression in Acts 
would be as objectionable to the orthodox in Asia 
120-160 A.D. as it was in 2 Peter, and accordingly we 
find that ' borne by the Holy Spirit ' is vouched for 
by Tertullian, a Montanist, by Irenaeus, who was 
a moderating influence between the Montanists and 
the orthodox, and by the Bezan MS. D, while D 
alone vouches for the expression applied to Judas 
and Silas, 'full of the Holy Spirit.' It was no more 
inconsistent with Luke's modesty to say that he was 
a Prophet full of the Holy Spirit than for St Paul 
to write to the Corinthians that the signs of an2Corxiii2. 
Apostle had been wrought among them through him, 
though he himself was nothing. It had been ordered 
by the Twelve on a previous occasion that the church 
at Jerusalem should select 'seven men of their ac vis. 
number who were testified to be full of the Holy 


Ghost and wisdom.' But in like manner Jude and 
A"" 33. Silas had just been selected for the office of Apostle 
— at least as great an ofSce as that of the seven — one 
in which the presence of the Holy Ghost was neces- 
sary, and now it was a fact that this presence had 
been vouchsafed. Still the words were, perhaps, 
unnecessary for the narrative, and so Luke omitted 
them on revision. The absence of the words could 
not alter the importance of the past fact, and, where 
it was a question of more words or fewer, he would 
allow more consideration to what critical readers 
might fancy than to the description which he might 
himself prefer to have given at length. 

Intimate knowledge of Silas on the part of the 
writer of the Acts. 

Ac XV 33. Returning now to the situation of Antioch, we 
find that Jude and Silas spent some time there, 
and then were duly dismissed with a blessing of 
peace by the brethren to return to those who had 
sent them as Apostles forth from Jerusalem. Now 
comes the difficult verse. 'Now it seemed good' 
(the (5e may be equally well translated 'now' or 
' but ' or ' and ' ) ' to Silas to remain there,' to which 
,8 adds, ' and Jude journeyed alone.' This would be 
still clearer if we did more justice to the aorist 
(eSoiev) and translated 'Now Silas decided to stay 


where he was' {avrov in its natural and classical 
meaning, for we have never been told that 
they started, though they had been solemnly dis- 
missed with prayer and blessing), 'and Jude 
went his journey alone' {^ovo^s Se 'lovSa? eTropeiQr,). 
'And Paul and Barnabas were staying in Antioch.' 
. . . Consequently when, five verses later, Paul 
selects Silas as his companion, he is not obliged to 
send for him to Jerusalem, as many critics suppose 
that he was,i and as he might have done for all that 
the Acts says to the contrary. So far the difficult 
verse is quite easy. This is because we have so far 
considered only the first draft of Luke, represented in 
the Western Recension. Luke has put in a short 
remark about himself as Silas. He has not said 
why he decided to stay behind at Antioch. But 
the two companions, Jude and he, who were accus- 
tomed to their ' yoke-fellowship ' as Prophets, were 
now, for some strong reason, at the eleventh hour, 
compelled to part company by Silas' decision. This 
may have been due to a presentiment or to some- 
thing of higher sense. The brethren may have been 
surprised, or may have seen nothing in it ; while yet 
it would seem particularly important to Silas himself 
Hence we find he inserted the account. It is just 
one of those touches which a writer would at first 
put in as part of his own experience, because he 
saw how the sudden decision was overruled for good 
1 E.g. Alford and Julicher quoted below. 


when Paul afterwards chose him as his companion. 
On second thoughts, however, we can well perceive 
how he would again omit the reference to his own 
movements, and his own feelings, to be inferred on 
his parting with his close friend Jude, although, 
indeed, this parting was about to find a parallel 
in the separation between Paul and Barnabas under 
more painful conditions. 

But the difficulty arises when we come to the 
evidence of the greater MSS., which omit the whole 
verse. Blass suggests that they omit it because the 
eye of a copyist had wandered from the last word 
of verse 33 avrov's to the last word avTov of verse 
34. This seems very probable indeed. And it is 
confirmed by the fact that D has a correction of 
its own reading by the addition of Trpo? aOroi;?, which 
makes imperfect sense by itself, and, if the remark 
about Jude is added, no sense at all. Blass prints in 
his text what the R.V. only prints in the margin, that 
Silas decided to remain at Antioch. And he gives 
the remark about Jude as part of the earlier text. 
As such, it is really the better attested of the two 
by textual evidence. If then we suppose that the 
decision of Silas was left by Luke to stand in his 
second draft of Acts, we may put the statement 
alongside of that of the Western Recension con- 
sidered above, that this was not his first visit 
to Antioch, and that, remembering the day of re- 
joicing long ago, he now stayed behind, a friend 


among friends, a Prophet amongst Prophets, a Jew 
amongst Jews, but as eager as Paul and Barnabas 
themselves to preach the Gospel of Jesus Messiah 
in a larger sphere to the dispersed among the 
Gentiles, and as well qualified by the gift of the 
Holy Ghost for the work whereunto he was chosen. 

At Corinth . the writer knows well St Paul's 
method of preaching. 

There is one statement in ^ which throws such 
a light upon St Paul's method of preaching in the 
Jewish synagogue, and which is so simply natural 
in itself, that it must here be selected for mention. 
It occurs in the account of his first visit to Corinth, 
where he ' was discoursing in the synagogue every ac xviii ^ 
sabbath-day and persuading both Jews and Greeks,' 
when Silas and Timotheus came down from Mace- 
donia to join him at last. Silas then was in a 
position to know exactly what Paul was doing and 
how he was trying to win these captious and quib- 
bling Corinthians to the belief that Jesus was the 
Messiah. And what says Luke in his first draft of 
Acts on this verse .'' It runs thus : ' He was dis- 
coursing and inserting the name of the Lord fesus, 
and persuading not only Jews, but also Greeks. 
5. And when both Silas and Timotheus ' — the both 

is used because Timothy had gone back as far as 

2 A 


Thessalonica/ while Silas had remained at Beroea, — 
' came down from Macedonia, Paul was pressing 
them with the word,2 testifying to the Jews that 
Jesus was the Messiah. 6. And when much talk was 
taking place and scripture (i.e. LXX) texts were being 
discussed in interpretation, some Jews began to oppose 
and blaspheme.' Nothing could be more graphic 
or explicit than this statement. It is natural that 
it should be so, for the author of Acts was there — 
at Corinth, He was not left behind at Philippi. 
He shows us that St Paul's object was to persuade 
the Jews that the Messiah had come, and to per- 
suade any Greeks who attended the synagogue of 
the same all-important truth. This object involved 
much discussion of scripture-texts and of the fulfil- 
ment of prophecy. The acceptance of prophecy 
fulfilled was the main pivot upon which the belief 
of his audience turned. He made use of his oppor- 
tunity every Sabbath, as did the Lord Himself on 
a memorable occasion at Nazareth, to show that 
'to-day is this scripture fulfilled in your ears.' He 
refers to this very teaching in his own Second Epistle 
to the Corinthians, in a tone of regret as if for the 
. Coriiii4 failures seen in his own ministration: 'But their 
minds were hardened : for until this very day at the 

' See above, chap, iii p. 89. 

° This is Blass's conjectural rendering, and he reads ffucetxe tiJ Xlr/if 
comparing Luke viii 45, xix 43 where the word occurs. He takes it to 
mean that Paul was encouraged by the good news brought by Silas 
and Timothy from Macedonia, i Th. iii 6 ff. 


reading of the old covenant the same veil remaineth 
unlifted ; which veil is done away in Messiah. But 
unto this day, whensoever Moses is read, a veil 
lieth upon their heart' Yet we have only to con- 
trast the almost entire failure of his preaching at 
Athens, where he was not addressing the members 
of a Jewish synagogue, but Gentiles who were not 
proselytes, in order to see how different was his 
success when the fulfilment of prophecy was avail- 
able for him as a main argument. The heathen 
Athenians were not approachable through Jewish 
prophecy : the heathens at Corinth who frequented 
the synagogue were approached. St Paul carefully 
adapted his discourses so as to familiarise the ear 
of his audience with the sound of 'the Lord Jesus' 
as 'Messiah,' in connexion with the more salient 
prophecies of O.T. After his failure at Athens heiCorii4. 
had come to Corinth ' in weakness and in fear and 
in much trembling.' Slowly and gradually he ven- 
tured to apply the pressure, by the word, which he 
found in the conclusive fulfilment of scripture. On 
the other hand, if the R.V. is right in giving in 
Acts xviii 5; 'he was constrained by the word,' we 
must understand either that he was wholly occupied 
in delivering the message, or that he was hampered 
and hindered on account of the Jews ; this latter is, 
however, an objectionable rendering, first, because it 
anticipates the antithetic remark ((5e) in the following 
verse that the progress of the gospel provoked the 


active opposition of the Jews, and especially because 
it was St Paul's regular opportunity and advantage 
to deal with the Jews first ; it was his help and 
not his hindrance. 

Date of the Acts. 

It remains for us in conclusion to consider how far 
we can go in fixing a date for the composition of the 
Acts. And here we welcome some very important 
remarks by Harnack.^ He points out that Acts 
xxviii 28 is a conclusion of the book which is not 
wholly satisfactory to the author. He wanted to 
exhibit the power of the Holy Ghost in the Apostles 
as the witnesses of Christ, and to shew how this 
power had brought the Gospel from Jerusalem to 
Rome and made an entrance for it into the heathen 
world, while the Jews involved themselves deeper 
and deeper in rejection. To this idea the words of 
xxviii 26-28 correspond, as a solemn conclusion of 
the work. But the reader has become so much 
interested in St Paul's life, especially in the wonder- 
ful way in which his journey to Rome has been 
brought about, that, though not strictly a part of 
the intention of the book, he adds the information, 
in 30-31, by way of appendix, that the prisoner, 

' Chronologie, i (1897), pp. 246-250. 


transported at length to Rome, has there been allowed 
to teach for two years without hindrance. 

Harnack remarks that Luke had covered almost 
exactly the same space in writing the Acts as he had 
in writing the Gospel, and Matthew covers, again, 
just about the same space. The portion of the task 
which he had set himself was exhausted. Therefore 
he has nothing more to say about St Paul's preaching 
at Rome, except verses 30 and 31 ; just as he con- 
cluded the Gospel with the briefest reference to the 
Ascension. "Whether he intended to write a third 
treatise is of course uncertain, for the subject which 
he had set himself was really exhausted in the main, 
and it is not easy to think of a point of view under 
which a third part, of equal value to the first and 
second parts, could have been added." 

The last sentence does not seem to do justice either 
to average powers of imagination or to the statement 
of the Muratorian Canon referred to above (p. 105), 
which so remarkably supports the view propounded 
by Ramsay apparently on grounds independent of it. 
It may be granted that the expression in Acts i i, 
' The first treatise,' need not be taken by itself as 
conclusive proof that when it was written the author 
had a third treatise ready on his pen: for it is possible 
that Luke may have said ' first,' meaning only ' former.' 
Still his Greek is so good that he is much more likely 
to have used not irpwro^ but irporepos if he had meant 
' former ' as implying only two treatises. And the 


onus of proof that ' first ' is used here of two only lies 
rather with the opponents of the view here maintained 
that Luke wrote three historical treatises of which the 
third is lost, though its contents were known to the 
Muratorian writer. Everything falls into its proper 
place if we assume that our Acts xxviii 31 is only the 
conclusion of Part II of the historian's work. He did 
not describe St Paul's trials at Rome in Part II 
because he was going to describe them in Part III, 
having already given us quite a plenty of Caesarean 
trial reports in Acts. He did not describe St Paul's 
journey to Spain for the same reason : he reserved 
them for Part III. He did not refer to St Peter after 
chapter xv for the same reason. He ended Part II 
as he has done knowing that Part III was to follow 
its close. 

It is not easy for us — and this reply may fairly be 
made to Harnack — to say what priceless information 
might not have been afforded by Luke in Part III, 
nor why it should not have contained twenty chapters 
similar to the narrative of travels and trials in 
xiii-xxviii. Had we possessed it, whole libraries of 
books which theologians have written would have 
been written in a very different sense. But when we 
find that 2 Peter was suppressed, only not quite 
absolutely and effectively, and when we have cause 
to hold that its suppression 1 was due to fear on 
the part of the orthodox majority that it might 

^ See The Christian Prophets, pp. 150 ff. 


countenance the errors of Montanism, we may keep at 
any rate an open mind on the question whether the 
same influence had not been active in causing the 
suppression of Luke's third treatise. It was not 
believed in those days, even after the destruction 
of Jerusalem, that the world was to last long; it 
was not supposed that unnumbered generations of 
Christians would desire to know the history of their 
origin as a Church. Nor can we say that the sup- 
pression, however practised, was intended to be a 
final and absolute destruction. It did not seem to the 
suppressors, if any, to be so heinous or so reckless a 
suppression as it does to us. 

To return to Harnack's view of the more exact 
determination of the date. Having set aside, too 
hastily as it seems to me, the idea of the existence 
of Part III, he decides that Acts was not written 
in 70 and the next following years, for had it been 
written then, the author must have employed the 
destruction of Jerusalem for his purpose. [But did 
he not do this in Part III .'] He holds, with 
'almost all investigators,' that the Gospel of Luke 
is written after 70 : much more, therefore, is Acts 
written after 70. But for this pressure by the 
Gospel towards a later date, he would be tempted 
to go back again to before 70; but now we must 
go on to about 80 for Acts.' On the other hand, 

' This reasoning, as if the Acts could not have been completed within 
5 or 10 years of its preceding, volume Luke, seems to be far from con- 


two powerful considerations forbid us to go later 
than about 93, the later part of Domitian's reign. 
(i) The writer of Acts never uses the Epistles of 
Paul as sources of his history nor as a reserve of 
doctrine.! "This fact is most striking — inconceiv- 
able, I think,'' says Harnack, "if the author wrote 
in Asia Minor, Greece, Macedonia, or Rome — and 
it goes strongly against a later date than 100. How 
accurately known, how familiarly used, by Clement, 
Barnabas, Ignatius, and Polycarp are the Pauline 
Epistles ! The difficulty cannot be solved by saying 
that the author of Acts was unwilling to use them 
Ac xiii 38 f. for reasons of tendency, either as concerns the 
doctrine or as concerns the history." (2) When 
Acts was written, " the relations between the 
Church and the Roman state were, so to speak, of 
a naif character. Thus alone can we explain the 
freedom of the narrative from prepossession : some- 
times it represents the Government as friendly, 
sometimes as hostile, sometimes as indifferent. 
Even the heathen multitudes feel, as yet, no per- 

vincing. The materials for Acts had been collected long before 7S> 
upon the reasonable hypothesis that St Peter and St Paul and 
St Philip or his daughters were the sources of all beside the 
We-portion. There seems to be no reason why it should not have 
appeared within two years or less of the appearance of the third 

' Sabatier, Biblioth. de VEcole des hautes etudes. Reville, Etudes de 
critique et d'histoire. Salmon, Int. to N.T., 1885, p. 398 ; quoted by 
Harnack. Zahn, Ei>tl. ii p. 408. 


manent irritation against the Christians and the 
monstrous 'flagitia nomini cohaerentia,' outrages 
sticking to the Name, lie still outside the purview 
of the book. This points to the time," Harnack 
thinks, "before the Domitianic persecution, that is 
before the last years of Domitian's reign, and there- 
fore nearly coincides with the limits of time which 
have been drawn above from the non-use of the 
Pauline Epistles." Attempts have been made to 
explain this attitude of the work as being political. 
Julicheri has gone so far as to say that Paul is 
represented in Acts as a Roman citizen when he 
was not, in order that the great Apostles might 
seem in 160 A.D. to have enjoyed the friendly 
esteem of Rome in 60 A.D. Even the silence about 
St Paul's martyrdom has been thus explained. 
" But such Tendency-criticism is not to be allowed 
wherever we can explain a phenomenon on natural 
grounds. There is nothing here to forbid us to 
take the simple datum simply. Before 93 it was 
possible for a historian to describe the relation of 
Church and State as uncertain, in fact, as much 
without a basis of principle as the author of Acts 
describes it." 

The date, therefore, 80-93 A.D. for the composi- 
tion of Acts must be considered very probable. 
Harnack sees nothing in the book to conflict with 
this estimate or do violence to it. It would be 

^Jahrb. fur Protest. Theol, Leipzig, 1882, p. 543. 


subject to objection if it were proved i that use 
has been made of Josephus in Acts ; but the proof 
is not conclusive. Moreover, the period is far 
enough removed from the lifetime of Paul to 
explain all the actual displacements of interests 
and ideas which divide the book " from the author- 
ship of Paul and from the Christian interests and 
struggles of 40-50 A.D." 

If Acts proceeded from this period — Dr. Sanday^ 
would prefer to stick closer to 80 A.D., and I agree 
with him — then 93 would be also the terminus ad 
quem of the Gospel of St Luke, and we could date 
it with probability 78-93. Such is Harnack's con- 
clusion, which, I cannot but think, requires to be 
modified by a computation of the probable age 
of Silas in accordance with the observations of the 
present volume upon his identity with the author 
of Acts. 

^In spite of V.xexik^, Josephus und Lucas (1894). Belser, Tiibinger 
Theol. Quartalschr. , 1895, p. 634 ff. The reference is Harnack's. 
'Inspiration (1893), p. 449. 


Aceldama 286 
Acts, contents of 13 : 
unfinished 35, 80, 86 : 
in 3 parts 41, 80, 374 f: 
prophetic in character 76 : 
unique in value 266 : 
date 15, 372 f: 
general effect 266 : 
little known in early Church 

267 : 
genuine 272 f, 313 f, 268 : 
conciliation of Peter and 

Paul in 272, 319 : 
not romance 272, 313 fif : 
a selection 273, 326, 337 : 
Hebraic and classical 274 : 
parallelism of 275, 319 ff, 

326 f: 
Bk of Enoch in 276 f, 281 : 
not meant to deceive 282, 

parenthesis in 293, 313 

Adam 297 
Agrippa I 351-353 
Alford 169, 367 n 
Ananias 312, 341 f 
Andronicus iB 
Angels 309 f, 325, 346 ff 

Angels looking into future 
122, 128 
fallen 140, 178, 233 
of punishment 1 40 
= messengers, 349, 33 1 

Anna 22 

Antichrist 67 ff 

Antioch, Church at 13, 15, 40, 
84, 163, 176, 356 f, 358, 
363- 366-369 

Antitype 297, see Restitution 

Antonia 273, 350 

Apocalypse 36, 119, anti- 
Roman 68 : see Revelation 

Apocryphal books 130 

Apostasy 70 ff 

Apostles 20: numerous 21, 
27, 83 : duties 125, 248 : 
how received 2 7 : are Pro - 
phets on circuit 2 7 ff, 40 f, 
82, 202, 248 : name in 
O.T. 29, 246 : Jesus is 
one 30 : end of their age 
242 n : false 263 

Apostolic succession 32 

Aquila 169, 284, r8: name z 

Aquila version of 74, 287 n 

Archelaus 353 n 



Aristarchus a Jew 38, 97, 106, 

Aristides 14 
Aristion 2 
Aristobulus 18 
Ark, see Deluge 
'As' in Luke 157, 301, 311 
Athronges 331-337 

Babel 276, 297, 300 
Babylon 77, 177 
Balaam 233 f, 254 f, 262, 309 
Baptism 150, 207, 243 n: of 

Jesus 301, 304, 325 
Barbarians 80 f 
Barjonas 2 
Barnabas 6, 13 f, 16, 39, 65, 

Bartholomew 2 
Baur, F. C. 219 
'Beast' 232 n 
Bebb, Mr L. 152 
Benjamin 19, 48, 50, 54 f 
Beroea 55, 86, 88 ff, 97 
Bezan MS 99, loi, and see 

Western Recension 
Bible, ignorance of 267 
Bishops 32 
' Bishop' 293, 302 
Blass, Dr Fr. 46, 51, 65, 69, 

82, 98 ff, 102, 268, 283, 

286 n, 293, 297, 309 f, 

3i2>33o> 34t, 349 f> 3S8, 

361, 370 n 
'Blind' in 2 Pet 150, 174 
'Bond' 168 

Caesarea 65, 74, 100, 252, 

3°9> 352 f 
Cam 333, 23s, 262 

Candler, Mr H. 319 
Captain of Host 45 
Cenchraea 71 
Charles, Dr 69, 134, 276 f 
Chase, Dr 115, 146 
'Christians' 14, 216 f 
Chrysostom 267 f 
Churchwardens 96 ff 
Circular epistle 17, 212 ff, 227 
Circumcision 38, 60 f, 65, 225 
Claudius Apollinaris 306 
Claudius Lysias 74 
Clement Alex. 242 n 
Clement Rom. 49, 126 
Clermont-Ganneau, M. 9 n 
'Colossians' 103 ff, 212, 227 f 
Communion Holy 26, 60, 236, 

2SS> 263 
Continuity of the Church 1 5 
Corinth 69, 8q, 94 f, 259, 

369 ff 
'Corinthians' 92, 95, 256, 

259 ff> 370 
Cornelius 323, 349-354 
'Corner-stone' 188 ff, 149, 

166, 171, 291, 321 
'Corruption' 304, 260 
Cyprus 65 
Cyrene 19 

Damascus 273, 344 

Daniel, Book of 20, 67 ff, 23, 

71 ff> 145 
Date of Acts 15, 372 ff 
of Peter's conversion 353 
of Jude's Epistle24i,252 
Davidson, Dr S. 8, 82, 156 
Decrees of Jerusalem 62, 363 
Deluge 131, 137 fif, 207, 297 ff, 


Demas 106 
Denial 134, 242 
Derbe 97 

Descent to Hades, 167, 205 ff 
' Description,' see Report. 
Dialect 285 ff 

Diary in Acts 34-36, 40, 79, 
81, lOI f 

' Dispersion ' of Jews 1 7 8, 1 86, 

284 n, 369 
Dium 89 
Doberus 98 
' Door of faith' 19, 65 
Dreams 237 
Driver, Dr 303 ff 

Ecclesiasticus 21, 23, 232, 
246, 256 

Ecstasy 307-313, 25, 36, ii8, 
348 f, 364 : phrases for 
349 : not physical removal 

Eden 297 

Egnatian Road 53-55 
Eighth Week 141, 145, 148 
Elamites 298 
Elders 32, 62 f, 172, 237, see 

Elijah 278, 300 
Elimination from Acts 79, 86 
Emendations 105, 135, 144, 

280 n 
Emperor-worship 68 
Enoch, Book of 76, 123,128 ff, 

134 ff) 139 ff. 14S. 174, 
232, 241 n, 244 n, 250, 
276 ff, 297 ff 

Epaenetus 18 

Epaphras 4, 38, 106 

Epaphroditus 31, 108 

'Ephesians' 17, 103, 107, 
176, 179,183-229: quotes 
Enoch 281 : not 2nd cen- 
tury 204, 219 ff: just 
after i Pet 206, 227 : 
title and address 213 f, 
218: genuine 219-223: 
needed 227 

Ephesus 64, 69 ff, 97 f, 214, 
223, 273 

Erastus 31 

Eucharist 26, 60 

Europe = Promised Land 43, 
45> 48, 84 

Eutychus 59 

EvangeHsts 202 n 

Eyewitness 87, 350 

Ezekiel 121 

Fadus 329, 333, 335 
Faith 243 
Farrar, Dean 156 
'Fast' 37, 168, 340 ff 
Fire of earth 133 ff 

on Sinai 290 

at Pentecost 290, 301 f 
Florinus Ep. to 63 
Forgiveness 28 
Fourth Gospel 341 
' Fulfilment ' 36, 42, 48-64, 124 
ff, 165, 29s ff, 299, 306, 
321 ff. 3SS. 370 etc. 

Gaius 97 ff 
Galatia 97 f 
'Galatians' 163, 169, 171, 

173. '75 
Galgala = Gangas 53 

Gamaliel 327, 329 n, 335 
Gentile Christians 19, 62, 77 



Gentiles, their offerings 72, 96 
formerly proselytes 186, 221 
Gibeonites 44 
Gilgal 44, 52, S3 
Gwynn, Dr 71 

' Habitation ' 293 

Haggai 291, 321 

Hallel 288-292 

Harnack, Dr3i7, 348, 364 ff, 

?7> 34 

Harris, Dr Rendel 268, 350, 

'Healer' 104 

Healing 337 

Heathens 74, 81, 219 ff, 186 

Hegesippus 273 

Herod 322, 330 n, 331, 
349-353: important to 
Rome 352 n 

Herodion 18 

' Hidden suggestions '126 

Hill-country 22 

Holtzmann 220 

Hort, Dr 14, 18, 46, 57, 119 
ff, 127, 135, 143, 179, 
180, 193, 212, 213, 214, 
216, 218, 226, 293 

" House of the Great King ' 
128, 141 ff, 187, 198, 
206, 218, 234 f, 250 n, 
279, 290, 299, 321 

Husbandmen 196 

Ignatius 168, 250 n 
'In' 157 
Inspiration 231 
Intention to write 130, 173 
Irenaeus 63, 274, 309, 365 
'Is' 13-16, 174, 215 

Isaiah quoted 188-192, 211, 

Italian band 11, 352 n 

James, St 15, 65 f 
Jason 18, 58, 97 
Jericho 45, 48 f, 53 
Jerusalem 273, 284, 292 : fall 

of 231, 238, 316, 375 
Jesus, name 2 : in inscr. God 

Jesus, an Apostle (Prophet) 

30 : Lord 215 f: (Joshua) 

42, 52, 60-63, 79, 167 
Jews hostile 69, 370 ; with 

Christians 76 ff, 171, 

220-227, 231, 260. See 

Joel 167, 237, 296 
John of Ephesus 68, 77, 79, 

154 : Epistles of 68 
John Baptist 83, 145, 243 n 
John Mark 83 f, 106, 166, 

Jordan 45> 5^ 
Joseph 2 : of Arimathea 22 
Josephus 239, 327-337, 352 f, 

Judas Iscariot 287, 293 f 
Judas of Galilee 328 ff 
Judas = Jude 17, 83, 112, 

252 f, 258 f 
Jude Epistle of 26, 230-265 
date of 230, 241 f, 252 : 
analysis 231 ff: related 
to 2 Peter 130 : does not 
copy it 245 : preserved 

Judgment 141, 157 
Jiilicher, Dr 79, 367 n, 377 


Justin Martyr 21, 274, 308 f, 

Juvenal 282 

'Kinsmen' St Paul's 184 

Kitto Dr 75 

Korah 233, 235, 254, 262 

Language of the world one 
282 : Greek 283 : or 
dialect 286 
Law on Sinai 290 
Lewin, Mr T. 53, 57, 91 f 
Lightfoot, Bp4, 5, 21, 32, 53, 
81, 87, 107 ff, 175, 212, 
Lightfoot, Dr John 289, 294 
' Lion' 158 
Lord's Day 26 
Lord's Supper 26, 60, 255, 

Lot 58, 255 
Lottery 47 f, 71, 56 
Love-feasts 255, 263 
Lucanus 1 i f 
Lucius 13, 17-19 
Luke, with Paul 13, 84, 89, 
91, 99, no, 164, 224: 
at Corinth 261, 369 fif: 
at Philippi 87 ff, 104, 109, 

at Antioch 356-369 : 17 f 
with Peter 340, 258 f: 
with Demas 38 : 
a Jew 37 f, 81, 78, 102, 164: 
not a Greek 78 : 
not a lawyer 105 : 
? physician 103 ff, 150 : 
a prophet 293, 301, 357, 
361 etc 


Luke, not the Macedonian 
44, 84 : 
a Roman citizen 78, 81 : 
is Silas 75 etc : 
a mediator 275, 324: 
wrote 2 Peter 75, m, ii6, 

15s. 195-197: 
wrote I Peter 14 n, 160 f, 

did not write Eph 183 : 
wrote ji of Acts 361, 367 : 
wrote a of Acts 361 : 
style IIS, 153. 156, 160, 

365. 373: 
parallelism, see Parallelism 
modesty 364-366 : 
accuracy 352, 327-336: 
candour 348, 282, 302, 348, 

knows Silas intimately 366, 

37o> 361 : 
explains Psalms 293, 320, 

324, 338, 355 : 
parenthesis in speeches 293, 

313 : 
ignorant of Montanism 365 : 
Gospel of 36, 82, 173, 249 

ff- 325> 356, 373. 378: 
classical 279 n, 349, 367, 

Lydia 48 ff 
Lystra 98 

Macedonia 46, 48, 53-57, 63, 

86, 95, 97, 224, 370 
Maclear, Dr 232 n 
Magic 338 f 
Man of Sin 68 
Manaen 17 
Maranatha 26 


Maria 2, 18 

Mark, Gospel of 251, 325 n, 

194, 196 
Martineau, Dr 216, 285 n, 

Matthew, Gospel of 286 n, 

294, 196 
Medes 298 
Melita 273, 79, 81 
Menander 308 
Messiah 21 f, 44, 67, 76, 119, 

125, 370 
Michael 233, 255 
Military forces 352 ff, 74 
Miriam 2, 18 
Mnason 65 
' Mockers ' 244 
Montanists 375, 294, 306, 

360, 362, 364 f 
' Montanist interpolations ' 

100, 362 
Moses 278, 322 : the first 

Prophet 30, 61, 166 
Muratorian fragment 80, 341, 

374 : emended 105 
Mure, Col. 326 

Names of Jews i ff 
Nathaniel 2 
Nazirite vow 66 
Nero 68, 338 
Ninth week 141 
Noah 178, 278 
Norman, H. 285 n 

Origen 56, 216 

Papias 293 

Parables 194 ff, 253, 260, 
279 n 

Parallelism 320-325 
Parthians 298 
Pastoral Epistles 77 
Paul, St, a Prophet 42, 50, 52, 
60, 89, 99, 148, 202 : 

at Athens 77, 89, 371 : 

at Miletus 64 : 

at Antioch 367 : 

at Rome 107, 211 f, 224, 

in Spain 80 : 

at Corinth 345, 369 ; 

in peril 72 ff, 96 : 

his humility 66 : 

' weakness ' 7 1, 89, 265 : 

modesty 365 : 

sphere of work 223 ff: 

Roman leanings 77, 261, 

use of O.T. 119, 188 ff, 370: 
quotes LXX 191, 370 : 
did not use the Gospels 193, 

modifies his language 210 : 
relations with Peter 161, 

223 ff : 
'conversion' 311 ff, 322 ; 
bhndness 311, 342 : 
? saw Jesus 311; 
visions etc 345 : 
identified with Antichrist 

67 ff: 
observes the law 66, 72 : 
his Epp. quoted by Fathers 

Pentecost 145 n, 283-292 ; 

fire at 290, 301 f: wind 

at 301 f 
Peter, name 3 : 
prophet 166 ff: 



Peter, martyr 80, 374 : 

in error 349 : 

in prison 323, 346-349, 354- 

his vision 346 : 

' conversion ' dated 353 : 

at Rome 1 1 1, 162, 212, 248, 

not a Greek scholar 112, 
170, 181, 184: 

character 161, 355 : 

career 175, 258: 

lines of his teaching 166 : 

eyewitness 341 
'i Peter' 42, 105 etc: by 
Luke for Peter, 14, in, 
117, 146, 160, 169: 
quotes O.T. 117: Chris- 
tian Prophets in 1 1 8, 1 2 9 : 
parallel with 2 P. 129 f; 
style 156 ff: contrasted 
with Paul's 177 : does 
not copy Rom 193 ff, nor 
Eph 180, 206 : related to 
Eph 179-210 
' 2 Peter ' by Luke for Peter 

111, 117, 160, 173 f, 257, 
365 : dangerous 100, 105, 
364: related to 'Jude' 

112, 231, 244 f, 253 ff: 
quotes O.T. 117 : Zahn's 
date for 231 ; parallel 
with I P. 129 f: style 
146, 156 ff, 247 : genuine 
156, 174, 181 : to whom 
addressed 231 : uses 
Enoch 279 ff: suppressed 

364, 374 
Philemon 106 
Philip 65, 166, 309 

Philippi 42, 46-53, 87 f, 90, 
98, 102, 108 f 

' Philippians ' 106 ff, 211 

Philo 14 

Pierian 46 

'Pit' 304 

'Place of Prayer' 42, 51, 53 

Plummer, Dr 38, 115 

Plutarch 50, 355 

Pontus 169 

' Poor in spirit ' 2 2 

'Portion' 42, 46 ff, 53, 89, 

' Potter's field ' 286 n 

' Power ' = spirit 155 

'Praises, Great' 288 

Prayerbook, obsolete 295 

Prisca, Priscilla, 3, 18, 169 

Prison, Spirits in 139 : apostles 
in 354: Peter in 323, 
346 ff 

Pronunciation 287 

Prophecy disappearing men- 
tion of it in a loi, 271, 
359 : oral 7, 244 f, 248 : 
written 124, 241 : false 

237> 294 
Prophets 15, 17, 19 ff, 65 etc : 
their functions 21, 28, 36, 

43. 125, 129, 201, 248: 
themes 39, 166 f, 171, 2 1 ff : 
continuity 24, 29, 118, 125, 

129, 199 f: 
Hmitations 122, 125, 130: 
rules in session 24 f, 125, 

258, 340: 
on circuit 25, 27 : = Apostles 
27 ff, 40 f, 82, 202, 248 : 
fasting 340 : reports 35 
259 : two and two 82 f : 




Prophets, name ' servants ' 24, 

. 3ij 109' 322: 
Moses the first 31 : 
how received 27, 168: 
guided 53 : 
in O.T. 29, 119 f : 
numerous 27 : 
Jesus one 30 : 
St Paul one 42, 64, 89 ; 
Rahab one 49 : 
prostration to 168, 342 : 
use of O.T. 188-193, 198 
Proselytes 77, 186, 225-227, 

260, 284, 352 n, 371 
Psalms xvi 304 : cvii 356 : 
cxlvi 291, 321, 355 : 
cxviii see Cornerstone 
Davidic 304 : on future 
life 305 ; used by Jews 
288-292, 321 
Pyrrhus 97 
Pythoness 50 

'Quo vadis?' 354 
Quotation of O.T. 116 ff, 157 
of other works 131 

Rabbis 290 
Rahab 48 f 

Ramsay, Prof. 14, 17, 34) 42' 
44, 47, 78, 82, 85, 107 

269, 358, 359 n 
'Refraction of history' 317 
Renan, E. 328 
' Reports,' ' narratives ' 35, 40 

259, 362 
' Restitution ' = antitype 297 

300, 316 
Resurrection 306 

Revelation 119, 129, 157, 

R.V. 65, 80, 107, 119, 199, 
200, 203, 234, 241, 249, 
258, 264 f, 286 n, 302, 
3°6, 3o7j 3°9. 349. 363. 
36S> 368, 371 

' Right hand ' 304 

Robinson, Dr Armitage 181 

Rome, in prophecy 68, 77, 
Church at 18, 38 n, 211, 225 

'Romans' 188, 210, 223, 226 

Samaria 252 f, 306 

Sanday, Dr 22, 184, 242, 378 

Saul name 2 : Prophet 17 

Scales 301 

Scarlet thread 49 

Schleiermacher 85 

Schmiedel, Dr 41, 66 

Schurer, Dr 284, 328-334,351 f 

Searching the O.T. 1 18 fif 

Sebaste 251 

Second century 273 

Secundus 97 

Self-contradictions of author 

Selo = Shiloh 48, 56 

Seufert, Dr 180 

Seven gifts, spirits 149 f, 154 

Seven steps 350 

Seventy disciples 31 

Silanus 9 

Silas name 3, 6, 9 ; not short 
for Silvanus 5, 170 : ' sent' 
6 : ' third ' 7, 10, 94 : 
' captain ' 7 f: Salvas 104 : 
a Prophet 31, 35, 166, 
295-298, 365 ff: 


Silas an Apostle 83 

a Roman citizen 46, 80 f 
a classical scholar 12, see 

I Peter etc 
not a carrier in, 160 
not Lucius 17 
'the brother whose praise 

etc ' 92 
disappears 90 f 
at Troas 43, 58, 87 : 
at Philippi 86, 109, 370 
at Beroea 88 ff, 95, 370 
at Antioch 357, 366 ff 
with Jude 364 ff, see Luke 
with St Paul 84-88, 148, 

170, 366 
in Epistles 91 ff 
modesty 8, 17, 91, 102, 

107, 161, 165, 364 
wrote Acts 85 f, 362 etc 

Siloaro 8 

Silvanus name 3, 5, 9, 90- 
95, 160 : god 12 : hand 
of 169 f — see Silas 

Simon Magus 307 ff 

Smith, Dr Adam 344 

Sodom 58, 233, 255, 261 

Solomon 279, 300 

Sopater, Sosipater 97, 102, 18 

Spain, journey to 80, 374 

Spies 45, 84 

Spirit Holy 149, 154, 364 ff: 
of God 143 : prophetic 
28, 99 f, 118 f, 154 

' Spirit of Jesus ' 42, 44, 100 : 
'of Christ' 43, 125, 256 

'Spirits in prison' 139 

Stars 139 

Statesman, St Paul a 42, 47 

Stephen, St 316, 325 

Stone of stumbling 150, 188- 

Strangers and sojourners 178, 

186, 205 
Style 114, 156, see Luke, i 

and 2 Peter 
'Superstructure' 276, 290, 

Symeon 22, 341 : Niger 13 
Synagogue 57, 62, 86 

Tabernacle 250 

Teaching of XII App. 25 ff 

Temple 300 : St Paul in 340 ff 

Tennyson 124, 128, 318 

Tertius 7, 94 

Tertullian 274, 365 

Text criticism 271 

Theodorus 2, 7, 331 

Thessalonica 42, 48, 56 ff, 69, 
88 f, 97, 102, 273, 370 

' I Thessalonians ' 78, 89, 91 

' 2 Thessalonians ' 68, 70 

Theudas 327-337 

'Times' 77, 119, 145 

Timothy 18, 31, 47, circum- 
cised 60, 84 f, 89, 91, 93, 
97 f, 102, 106, no, 369 

Titus 61, 92, no 

Tobit 302, 312 

Tongue-speaking 203, 281- 
289, 295, 300 

Tradition 25, n4, 214 

Troas 43 f, 58 

'Troop' 336 

Trophimus 93, 97 f, 102, no 

Tychicus 31, 97 f, 102, no, 

Types 42-59. 232, 264, 300 ff, 



Uncircumcision 187 — see 

Proselytes, Heathens 
Understanding 163 
Unity of Church 204 
'Unsearchable' 203 

Virgil 12 
Visions 340 f, 345 

VVe-document 33 ff, 86, 96, loi 
not a foreign work 34 
is only memory 85, 357 f 
by a Jew 37 : by a Prophet 

39 f 

by Silas 41, 84, 88, 90, 363 
? is one by Barnabas 39 
runs into context 40, 82, 85, 

same style with Acts 41,81 
are there two? 85, 357 
disappearing 359 
absence of We xoi 
is it a Travel-document? 

is it of Antioch? 359 

more may be found 358 
combined with ^ reading 
'Week,' prophetic 76, 145 n, 

278 f 
Weiss, Dr B. 226 

Westcott, Bp 105, 273, see 

Western recension (/S) of Acts 
51, 82, 65, 79, 86, 99- 
loi, 310, 312, 340, 349, 

3S6> 358. 362 
by Luke 268 ff 
is first draft 269, 310, 350, 

356-36°. 368 
its character 270 f, 361 
proves Acts genuine 270 
combined with We 360 
theories about 360 
supplies facts 349 etc, 366 
Witch of Endor 50 
Wordsworth, Bp. Chr. 37 
Works, St Paul on 210 
'Written down' 135, 141 
'Wrongdoer' 171 

'Yoke-fellow' 88, 107 -f, 112, 

Zahn, Dr T. 89, 127, 183, 
188, 194, 202, 213, 219- 
221, 223, 226, 228, 230, 
238 f, 244 f, 250 f, 255, 
257. 261 n, 317, 328 f 

Zarephath 59 

Zechariah 246, 286 n, 290, 

Zimmer, Dr 9 



The Christian Prophets and 
the Prophetic Apocalypse. 

pp. 263 + XV. and indices. Price 6s. Macmillan, 1900. 


London Quarterly Review. — We may call attention to the vigour 
of style, the fair-minded treatment of opposing views, the adequate scholar- 
ship, the close grasp of the literature of the subject as features which 
render the book worthy of serious study. Whether convinced by its 
reasoning or not, the student of the Apocalypse and its problems will 
admit it to be a stimulating and valuable piece of work. 

Church Quarterly Review, — It would be difficult to read Dr. 
Selwyn's book without admiring the scholarly industry and care which he 
has bestowed upon the details and various bearings of his subject. . . . 
Dr. Selw7n has some passages on ' leading ideas ' of the Apocalypse which 
deserve attention, and he has carefully studied some of its most interesting 

S.iTURDAV Review. — Dr. Selwyn has marshalled the ai'guments from 
language, style, and theology very sti'ongly against the unity of authorship. 

Scottish Guardian. — Whatever we may think of Dr. Selwyn's con- 
clusions, there is much that is very suggestive in this book. 

Guardian. — Dr. Selwyn's book is interesting and helpful to the student 
of the Apocalypse. We hope all such will procure it. They will learn much 
from it. 

St. James's Gazette. — Dr. Selwyn has made one of the recent additions 
to the literature (of the Apocalypse) of real value, a book which every 
student of this difficult problem should read. 

Scotsman. Dr. Selwyn writes in a calm and clear and restrained 

manner, and commends himself to the reader not less by the sobriety of his 
judgments than the abundance of his research. That the treatise will 
commend universal acceptance is not to be expected, but those who are 
interested in the important subject discussed will find in it much that is 
both informative and suggestive. 

Glasgow Herald.— An interesting and somewhat novel theory is pro- 
pounded in this learned essay. It is a piece of scholarly work, and will 
doubtless afford food for much discussion among Biblical critics. 

Christian World. — The Head Master of Uppingham deserves the 
thanks of New Testament students for this piece of acute, scholarly 
criticism. Some of his conclusions may seem startling and his differences 
with Westcott, Lightfoot, Zahn, and Harnack rather audacious. But the 
author is one of those who think one of the worst misfortunes that can 
befal theology, or any other study, is that a writer, however accurate or 
powerful, should be supposed to be above criticism. . . . All these posi- 
tions . . . are maintained with a wealth of learning, wit, and caution that 
carry conviction. , . . We hope Dr. Selwyn will write a larger book on 
the subject, which he knows as few do. 

Expository Times.— Dr. Selwyn has mastered his subject. . . It is 
a study in early Church History of the most interesting kind. 

Churchwoman.— The questions he raises bristle with both difficulty 
and interest, and our more scholarly readers will enjoy breaking a lance 
with this liberal but careful student. 

Outlook. — Dr. Selwyn has dared to be independent. 

Critical Review. — With some reason the author speaks of his subject 
as one that relates to "the most important body of teachers and the most 
characteristic kind of teaching which have ever escaped notice, in their 
specific features, by theologians ancient and modern." It is strange that 
this important field of study should have been so persistently overlooked, 
and that the Prophets of the N.T. should have been so little regarded. . 
Dr. Selwyn does something to remove the reproach. . . . There is a 
good deal in this book that is fresh and interesting and provocative of 
thought. . . It has the great merit of being interesting and suggestive 
all through. 


The gift of Prophecy was continuous from Jewish to Christian times. 
The Apocalypse is the fullest and ripest fruit of Christian Prophecy. . 
The Prophet and Elder and Seer who wrote the Apocalypse, so fiir from 
being the Evangelist, differs from him toio caelo. The Prophetic order 
became enfeebled in the first half of the second century by the growth of 
the irregular and dangerous vagaries of the Montanists ; while the accep- 
tance of the Fourth Gospel coincides with what to the Prophets was the rival 
growtli of church order and episcopal organisation. The Churches were 
compelled by the divine law of their being to decide between Prophecy and 
Order. The chief theatre of the conflict was Asia Minor. . . One 
definite conclusion to which the present enquiry has led me is that the Seer 
(of the Apocalypse) had been a Jewish Elder, in fact a member of the 
Judicial Committee of the Sanhedrim. 

A Catalogue 


Theological Work; 

published by 

Macmillan &> Co., Ltd. 

St. Martin's Street 
London, W.C. 


The Bible — ''■«-°= 

History of the Bible .... 3 

Biblical History . . • • • 3 

The Old Testament . . , . . 4 

The New Testament ...... 7 

History of the Christian Church . .13 

The Church of England 14 

Devotional Books . . . .18 

The Fathers 19 

hvmnology ........ 20 

Religious Teaching 20 

Sermons, Lectures, Addresses, and Theological 

Essays . . . . . 21 

^be Bible 


THE BIBLE IN THE CHURCH. By Right Rev. Bishop West- 
COTT. loth Edition. Pott 8vo. 4s. 6d. 


THE HOLY BIBLE. (Eversley Edition.) Arranged in Paragraphs, 
with an Introduction. By J. W. IVIackail, M.A. 8 vols. Globe 
8vo. 5s. each. 

Vol. I. Genesis — Numbers. II. Deuteronomy — 2 Samuel. 
III. I Kings — Esther. IV. Job — Song of Solomon. V. Isaiah 
— Lamentations. VI. Ezekiel — Malaclii. VII. Matthew — John. 
VIII. Acts — Revelation. 
THE MODERN READER'S BIBLE. A Series of Books from the 
Sacred Scriptures presented in Modern Literary Form. The Text 
is that of the Revised Version. It is used by special permission 
of the University Presses of Oxford and Cambridge. Edited by 
R. G. MouLTON, M.A. Pott 8vo. 2s. 6d. each volume. 










BIBLE STORIES (Old Testament). 

BIBLE STORIES (New Testament). 

ST. /AMES'S GAZETTE.— " Vfhi\e the sacred text has m no way been tampered 
with, the books are presented in modem literary form and are furnished with an intro- 
duction and notes by Professor Richard G. Moulton. The notes are scholarly, and of 
real help to the student." 

BIBLE LESSONS. By Rev. E. A. Abbott, D.D. Crown 8vo. 43. 6d. 

Illustrated. Crown Svo. Ss. 
STORIES FROM THE BIBLE. By Rev. A. J. Church. Illus- 
trated. Two Series. Crown Svo. 3s. 6d. each. 
By Albert S. Cook, Ph.D., Rutgers Professor of the English 
Language and Literature in Yale University. Svo. 17s. net 


Biblical History — continued. 



2nd Edition. Globe 8vo. 2s. 6d. 

H. Gaskoin. Pott 8vo. IS. each. Part I. Old Testament ; II. 

New Testament ; III. Three Apostles. 
THE NATIONS AROUND ISRAEL. By A. Keary. Cr. 8vo. 3s. 6d. 
VILLAGE SERMONS. By Rev. F. J. A. HoRT, D.D. 8vo. 6s. 

This Volume contains a Series of Sermons dealing in a popular 

way with the successive Books of which the Bible is made up. 

They form an admirable introduction to the subject. 

AND THE NATIONS. By Prof. J. F. M'Curdy. 3 Vols. 

8vo. 14s. net each. Vol. I. To the Downfall of Samaria. 

Vol. II. To the Fall of Nineveh. Vol. III. Completing the Work. 
AMERICAN HISTORICAL REVIEW. — "'Sis, method is to interweave the 
histories of the connected peoples in each period, to point out the historical presuppos- 
itions and moral principles in the prophetic writings, and to treat the social constitution 
in separate sections. This method has obvious advantages in the hands of a competent 
scholar and good writer, and is employed by Mr. M'Curdy with excellent effect. His 
presentation of the material is admirable in arrangement ; his style, though somewhat 
formal and Gibbonesque, is clear and picturesque." 

TIMES. — *'A learned treatise on the ancient history of the Semitic peoples as 
interpreted by the new light obtained from the modern study of their monuments." 

EXPOSITORY T'/jlf^i'.— "The work is very able and very welcome. . . . It will 
take the place of all existing histories of these nations." 


Canon Maclear. With Four Maps. Pott 8vo. 4s. 6d. 
ing the connection of the Old and New Testament. By the same. 
Pott 8vo. 5s. 6d, 

the same. Pott 8vo. is. 

the same. Pott 8vo. Is. 
THE BIBLE FOR HOME READING. Edited, with Comments and 
Reflections for the use of Jewish Parents and Children, by C. G. 
MoNTEFiORE. Part I. To THE Second Visit of Nehemiah to 
Jerusalem. 2nd Edition. Extra Crown 8vo. 4s. 6d. net. 
Part II. Containing Selections from the Wisdom Literature, the 
Prophets, and the Psalter, together with extracts from the 
Apocrypha. Extra Crown 8vo. 5s. 6d. net. 
JEWISH CHRONICLE.—" By this remarkable work Mr. Claude Montefiore has 
put the seal on his reputation. He has placed himself securely in the froilt rank of con- 
temporary teachers of religion. He has produced at once a most original, a most 
instructive, and almost spiritual treatise, which will long leave its ennobljng^mark on 
Jewish religious thought in England. . . . Though the term ' epoch-making \ is often 
misapplied, we do not hesitate to apply it on this occasion. _ We cannot but believe that 
a new era may dawn in the interest shown by Jews in the Bible." 


By C. M. Yonge. Globe 8vo. is. 6d. each ; also with comments, 


The Old Testament — continued. 

3s. 6d. each. — First Series: Genesis to Deuteronomy. — Second 
Series : JOSHUA TO Solomon. — Third Series: Kings and the 
Prophets. — Fourth Series : The Gospel Times. — Fifth Series : 
Apostolic Times. 
Origin, Preservation, Inspiration, and Permanent Value. By Rev. 
A. F. KiRKPATRiCK, B.D. Crown 8vo. 3s. net. 

TIMES. — " An eloquent and temperate plea for the critical study of the Scriptures." 
MANCHESTER GC/ARDlAIf.—" An exoeWent introduction to the modern view 
of the Old Testament. . . . The learned author is a genuine critic. . . . He expounds 
clearly what has been recently called the ' Analytic ' treatment of the books of the Old 
Testament, and generally adopts its results. . . . The volume is admirably suited to 
fulfil its purpose of familiarising the minds of earnest Bible readers with the work which 
Biblical criticism is now doing." 

THE DOCTRINE OF THE PROPHETS. Warburtonian Lectures 
18S6-1890. By Rev. A. F. Kirkpatrick, B.D, 2nd Edition. 
Crown 8vo. 6s. 

SCOTSMAN". — "This volume gives us the result of ripe scholarship and competent 
learning in a very attractive form. It is written simply, cleai'ly, and eloquently ; and it 
invests the subject of which it treats with a vivid and vital interest which will commend 
it to the reader of general intelligence, as well as to those who are more especially 
occupied with such studies." 

GLASGO^V HERALD.—" Professor Kirkpatrick's book will be found of great value 
for purposes of study.' 

BOOKMAN. — "As a summary of the main results of recent investigation, and as a 
thoughtful appreciation of both the human and divine sides of the prophets' work and 
message, it is worth the attention of all Bible students." 

TESTAMENT. By Frederick Denison Maurice. New 
Edition. Crown 8vo. 3s. 6d. 

By the same. New Edition. Crown 8vo. 3s. 6d. 
Growth and Formation of the Hebrew Canon of Scripture. By The 
Right Rev. H. E. Ryle, Bishop of Exeter, and Ed. Cr. 8vo. 6s. 
This edition has been carefully revised throughout, but only two sub- 
stantial changes have been found necessary. An Appendix has been added 
to Chapter IV., dealing with the subject of the Samaritan version of the 
Pentateuch ; and Excursus C (dealing with the Hebrew Scriptures) has been 
completely re-written on the strength of valuable material kindly supplied 
to the author by Dr. Ginsburg. 

EXPOSITOR.—" Scholars are indebted to Professor Ryle for having given them for 
the first time a complete and trustworthy history of the Old Testament Canon." 

EXPOSITORY TIMES. — "He rightly claims that his book possesses that most 
Enelish of virtues— it may be read throughout. ... An extensive and minute research 
lies concealed under a most fresh and flexible English style. 

POSITION. By Amos Kidder Fiske, Author of " The Jewish 
Scriptures," etc. Crown Svo. 6s. 
H. E. Ryle, Bishop of Exeter. Cr. Svo. 3s. net. 


The Old Testament — continued. 



With Introd. and Notes by Bishop H. E. Ryle. Cr. 8vo. los. net. 
In the present work the attempt has been made to collect, arrange in 
order, and for the first time print in full all the actual quotations from the 
books of the Old Testament to be found in Philo's writings, and a few of 
his paraphrases. For the purpose of giving general assistance to students 
Dr. Ryle has added footnotes, dealing principally with the text of Philo's 
quotations compared with that of the Septuagint ; and in the introduction 
he has endeavoured to explain Philo's attitude towards Holy Scripture, 
and the character of the variations of his text firom that of the Septuagint. 

TIMES. — " This book will be found by students to be a very useful supplement and 
companion to the learned Dr. Drummond's important work, Philo Judtzus." 

The Pentateuch — 

Translated by Philip H. Wicksteed, M.A. 8vo. 14s. 
The Psalms — 

Amended Version, with Historical Introductions and Explanatory 
Notes. By Four Friends. New Edition. Crown 8vo. 5s. net. 
SPECTATOR. — "One of the most instructive and valuable books that has been 
published for many years. It gives the Psalms a perfectly fresh setting, adds a new 
power of vision to the grandest poetry of nature ever produced, a new depth of lyrical 
pathos to the poetry of national joy, sorrow, and hope, and a new intensity of spiritual 
light to the divine subject of every ejaculation of praise and every invocation of want. 
We have given but imperfect illustrations of the new beauty and li^ht which the trans- 
lators pour upon the most perfect devotional poetry of any day or nation, and which they 
pour on it in almost every page, by the scholarship and perfect taste with which they have 
executed their work. We can only say that their version deserves to live long and to 
pass through many editions." 

GOLDEN TREASURY PSALTER. The Student's Edition. 
Being an Edition with briefer Notes of " The Psalms Chrono- 
logically Arranged by Four Friends." Pott 8vo. 2s. 6d. net. 
THE PSALMS. With Introductions and Critical Notes. By A. C. 
Jennings, M.A., and W. H. Lowe, M.A. In -^ vols. 2nd 
Edition. Crown 8vo. los. 6d. each. 
THE BOOK OF PSALMS. Edited with Comments and Reflections 
for the Use ot Jewish Parents and Children. By C. G. Monte- 
FIORE. Crown 8vo. is. net. 

Isaiah — 

ISAIAH XL.— LXVI. With the Shorter Prophecies allied to it 
By Matthew Arnold. With Notes. Crown 8vo. 5s. 

Israel's Restoration {Isaiah xl.-lxvi.) Arranged and Edited for 
Young Learners. By the same. 4th Edition. Pott Svo. Is. 

Zechariah — 

ARIAII, Hebrew and LXX. By W. H. Lowe, M.A. 8vo. ids. 6d, 



GOSPEL OF ST. PETER. By H. B. Swe?e, D^. 8vo 5s net 

MENT : The Bampton Lectures, 1864. By Thomas Dehany 
Bernard, JM.A. Fifth Edition. Crown 8vo. 6s 

MENT. By F. G. Kenyon, Litt.D., Assistant Keeper of Manu- 
scripts m the British Museum. 8vo. r/« the Press 

MUZZEY, B.D. Fcap. 8vo. 5s. 
IMMANUEL Kant.— " The Rise of the Bible as the people's book is the greatest 
blessing that the human race has ever experienced." 


P. Du BosE, M.A. Crown 8vo. 7s. 6d. 
THE MESSAGES OF THE BOOKS. Being Discourses and Notes 

on the Books of the New Testament. By Dean Farrar. 8vo 14s 
MENT. With an Appendix on the last Petition of the Lord's 

Prayer. By Bishop Lightfoot. Crown 8vo. 7s. 6d. 

Lightfoot. 8vo. 14s. 
BIBLICAL ESSAYS. By Bishop Lightfoot. 8vo. 12s. 

and Edition. 2 vols. Crown 8vo. 12s. 


CENTURIES. By Right Rev. Bishop Westcott. 7th Edition. 

Crown 8vo. los. 6d. 

Crown 8vo. J^- net. 

Crown 8vo. 5s. net. 
THE REVELATION OF JESUS : A Study of the Primary Sources 

of Christianity. By G. H. Gilbert, Ph.D. Crown 8vo. Js. net. 

Ph.D. Crown 8vo. 5s. net. 

Mathews, Professorof New Test. Hist, at the University of Chicago. 

TINE (175 B.C.-70 A.D.). By Shailer Mathews, A.M. 
Crown 8vo. 3s. 6d. 

NEW TESTAMENT. By Marvin R. Vincent, D.D. 
Crown 8vo. 3s. 6d. 

MENT. By Ezra P. Gould, D.D. Crown 8vo. 3s. 6d. 

NEW TESTAMENT. By Prof. H. S. Nash. 3s. 6d. 

B. W. Bacon, D.D. Crown 8vo. 3s. 6d. 


The New Testament — continued. 

Text revised by Bishop Westcott, D.D., and Prof. F. J. A. 
HoRT, D.D. 2 vols. Crown 8vo. los. 6d. each. — Vol. I. 
Text ; II. Introduction and Appendix. 

Library Edition. 8vo. {Text in Macmillan Greek Type. 
School Edition. i2mo, cloth, 4s. 6d. ; roan, 5s. 6d. ; morocco, 
6s. 6d. ; India Paper Edition, limp calf, 7s. 6d. net. 
By W. J. HiCKiE, M.A. Pott 8vo. 3s. 
ACADEMY. — "We can cordially recommend this as a very handy little volume 
compiled on sound principles." 

Blass, University of Halle. Authorised English Translation. 8vo. 
14s. net. 
TIMES. — "Will probably become the standard book of reference for those students 
who enter upon minute grammatical study of the language of the New Testament." 

8vo. 4S. 6d. net. 
GUARDIAN. — " On the whole, Professor Blass's new book seems to us an im- 
portant contribution to criticism. ... It will stimulate inquiry, and will open up fresh 
lines of thought to any serious student." 


Frederic Henry Chase, D.D. 8vo. 7s. 6d. net. 
The sequel of an essay by Dr. Chase on the old Syriac element in the 
text of Codex Bezae. 

TIMES. — " An important and scholarly contribution to New Testament criticism." 

in the Text of the Revised Version. By Rev. E. A. Abbott and 
W. G. RnsHBEOOKE. Crown 8vo. 3s. 6d. 
SYNOPTICON : An Exposition of the Common Matter of the Synop- 
tic Gospels. By W. G. Rushbrooke. Printed in Colours. 4to. 
35s. net. Indispensable to a Theological Student. 
WESTCOTT AND HORT TEXT. By Rev. Arthur Wright, 
M.A. Demy 4to. 6s. net. 
" Every such effort calls attention to facts which must not be overlooked, but yet to 
the scholar they are but as dust in the balance when weighed against such solid con- 
tributions as Rushbrooke's Synopticon or Wright's Synopsis, which provide instruments 
for investigation apart from theories." — Professor Armitage Robinson at Church Congress, 
Bradford, 1898. 

Arthur Wright. Crown Svo. 5s. 

CAMBRIDGE REVIEW.—" The wonderful force and freshness which we find on 
every page of the book. There is no sign of hastiness. All seems to be the outcome of 
years of reverent thought, now brought to light in the, clearest, most telling way. . . . 
The book will hardly go unchallenged by the different schools of thought, but all will 
agree in gratitude at least for its vigour and reality." 


By Right Rev. Bishop Westcott. 8th Ed. Cr. 8vo. los. 6d. 

GOSPELS. By the Rev. J. H. Wilkinson, M.A., Rector of 

Stock Gaylard, Dorset. Crown Svo. 3s. net. 


The Gospels — coniinued. 

ANDER, D.D. Oxon., LL.D. Dublin, D.C.L. Oxon., Archbishop of 
Armagh, and Lord Primate of All Ireland. New Edition, Revised 
and Enlarged. Crown 8vo. 6s. 

BRITISH /F££AX F.—" Really a new book. It sets before the reader with 
delicacy of thought and felicity of language the distinguishing characteristics of the 
several gospels. It is delightful reading. . . . Religious literature does not often 
furnish a book which may so confidently be recommended." 

BuRKiTT, M.A. Crown 8vo. 2s. 6d. net. 
Gospel of St. Matthew — 

as Revised by Bishop Westcott and Dr. Hort. With Intro- 
duction and Notes by Rev. A. Sloman, M.A. Fcap. 8vo. 2s. 6d. 

MANCHESTER GUARDIAN.—" It is sound and helpful, and the brief introduc- 
tion on Hellenistic Greek is particularly good." 

Gospel of St. Mark— 

THE GREEK TEXT. With Introduction, Notes, and Indices. 
By Rev. H. B. SwETE, D.D., Regius Professor of Divinity 
in the University of Cambridge. 8vo. 1 5s. 
TIMES. — "A learned and scholarly performance, up to date with the most recent 
advances in New Testament criticism." 

THE EARLIEST GOSPEL. A Plistorico-Critical Commentary on 
the Gospel according to St. Mark, with Text, Translation, and In- 
troduction. By Allan Menzies, Professor of Divinity and Biblical 
Criticism, St. Mary's College, St. Andrews. 8vo. 8s. 6d. net. 

Being the Outlines of the Life of our Lord as given by St. Mark, with 
additions from the Text of the other Evangelists. Edited, with Notes 
and Vocabulary, by Rev. A. Calvert, M.A. Fcap. 8vo. 2s. 6d. 

Gospel of St. Luke — 

as Revised by Bishop Westcott and Dr. Hort. With Introduction 
and Notes by Rev. J. Bond, M.A. Fcap. 8vo. 2s. 6d. 
GLASGOIV HERALD,—" The notes are short and crisp— suggestive rather than 

of Lectures on the Gospel of St. Luke. By F. D. Maurice. 
Crown Svo. 3s. 6d. 

with Parallels, Illustrations, Various Readings, and Notes, by the 
Rev. Arthur Wright, M.A. Demy 4to. 7s. 6d. net. 

ST LUKE THE PROPHET. By Edward Carus Selwyn, D.D. 
Gospel Of St. John- Vmtke Press 

Exposition of St. John, Chapters XIII. to XVH. By Rev. Canon 
Eer.nard, M.A. Crown Svo. 7s. 6d. 


Gospel of St. John — continued. 

EXPOSITOR Y TIMES. — " Quite recently we have had an exposition by him whom 
many call the greatest expositor livmg. But Canon Bernard's work is still the work that 
will help the preacher most." 

THE GOSPEL OF ST. JOHN. By F.D.Maurice. Cr.Svo. 3s. 6d. 

the late Archbishop Benson. With an Introduction by 
Adeline, Duchess of Bedford. 8vo. [/« the Press. 

THE APOSTLES. Being the Hulsean Lectures for 1900-1. 
By the Rev. Dr. Chase, President of Queen's College, Cambridge. 

[/» ihe Press. 


CODEX BEZAE. By F. H. Chase, B.D. 8vo. 7s. 6d. net. 


With Notes by Rev. F. Rendall, M.A. Cr. 8vo. 9s. 

SATURDAY REVIEW.— "Hit. Rendall has given us a very useful as well as a 

very scholarly book. " 

MANCHESTER GUARDIAN.—" Mr. Rendall is a careful scholar and a thought- 
ful writer, and the student may learn a good deal from his commentary." 

8vo. 3s. 6d. 

THE ACTS OF THE APOSTLES. Being the Greek Text as 
Revised by Bishop Westcott and Dr. Hort. With Explanatory 
Notes by T. E. Page, M.A. Fcap. 8vo. 3s. 6d. 

ACTS OF THE APOSTLES. The Authorised Version, with Intro- 
duction and Notes, by T. E. Page, M.A., and Rev. A. S. 
Walpole, M.A. Fcap. 8vo. 2s. 6d. 

BRITISH WEEKLY.—" Mr. Page's Notes on the Greek Text of the Acts are very 
well known, and are decidedly scholarly and individual. . . . Mr. Page has written an 
introduction which is brief, scholarly, and suggestive. 

Jerusalem. The Church of the Gentiles. The Church 
of the World. Lectures on the Acts of the Apostles. By 
Very Rev. C. J. Vaughan. Crown 8vo. los. 6d. 
THE EPISTLES of St. Paul— 

with English Notes. By Very Rev. C. J. Vaughan. 7th Edition. 
Crown 8vo. 7s. 6d. 

tion by Rev. W. G. Rutherford. 8vo. 3s. 6d. net. 

PILOT. — "Small as the volume is, it has very much to say, not only to professed 
students of the New Testament, but also to the ordinary reader of the Bible. . . . The 
layman who buys the book will be grateful to one who helps him to realise that this per- 
plexing Epistle ' was once a plain letter concerned with a theme which plain men might 



Crown 8vo. 6s. 

Dr. Marcus Dods in the Bookman.—" Anything from the pen of Dr. Hort is sure to 

be informative and suggestive, and the present publication bears his mark. . . . There 

is an air of originality about the whole discussion ; the difSculties are candidly faced, and 

the explanations offered appeal to our sense of what is reasonable." 


The Epistles of St. Vsxl— continued. 

TIMES.— "WiW be welcomed by all theologians as ' an invaluable contribution to the 
study ot those Epistles as the editor of the volume justly calls it." 

,^^{^^ CHRONICLE.— "The: lectures are an important contribution to the study 
of the famous Epistles of which they treat." 

Destination and Date. By E. H. Askwith, M.A. Crown 8vo. 
3s. 6d. net. 

Text, with Introduction, Notes, and Dissertations. By Bishop 
LiGHTFOOT. loth Edition. 8vo. I2s. 

with Introduction and Notes. By Canon J. Armitage Robinson. 
Svo- [In the Press. 

Text, with Introduction, Notes, and Dissertations. By Bishop 
LiGHTFOOT. 9th Edition. 8vo. I2s. 

tion, Paraphrase, and Notes for English Readers. By Very Rev. 
C. J. Vaughan. Crown 8vo. 5s. 

PHILEMON. A Revised Text, with Introductions, etc. By 
Bishop LiGHTFOOT. 9th Edition. Svo. 12s. 

amination Notes. By Rev. G. W. Garrod. Crown 8vo. 3s. net. 

Analysis and Notes by the Rev. G. W. Garrod, B.A. Crown 
Svo. 2s. 6d. net. 

Analysis and Notes by Rev. G. W. Garrod. Cr. 8vo. 2s. 6d. net. 

COLOSSIANS, AND PHILEMON. With Introductions and 
Notes. By Rev. J. Ll. Davies. 2nd Edition. Svo. 7s. 6d. 

THE EPISTLES OF ST. PAUL. For English Readers. Part L con- 
taining the First Epistle to the Thessalonians. By Very Rev. C. 
J. Vaughan. 2nd Edition. Svo. Sewed, is. 6d. 

COMMENTARIES. By the late J. B. Lightfoot, D.D., 
D.C.L., LL.D., Lord Bishop of Durham. Svo. 12s. 

AND THREE FRIENDS. Translated by Arthur S. Way, 
M.A. Crown Svo. 5s. net. 

The Epistles of St. Peter— 

THE FIRST EPISTLE OF ST. PETER, L i to II. 1 7. The Greek 
Text, with Introductory Lecture, Commentary, and additional 
Notes. By the late F. J. A. Hort, D. D. , D. C .L. , LL. D. Svo. 6s. 

T. Howard B. Masterman, Principal of the Midland Clergy 
College, Edgbaston, Birmingham. Crown Svo. 3s. 6d. net. 


The Epistle of St. James— 

THE EPISTLE OF ST. JAMES. The Greek Text, with Intro- 
duction and Notes. By Rev. JOSEPH B, Mayor, M.A. 2nd 
Edition, Svo. 14s. net. 

EXPOSITORY TnfES.—''T\vfi. most complete edition of St. James in the English 
language, and the most serviceable for the student of Greek." 

BOOKMA N, — " Professor Mayor's volume in every part of it gives proof that no time 
or labour has been grudged in mastering this mass of literature, and that in appraising it 
he has exercised the sound judgment of a thoroughly trained scholar and critic. . . . 
The notes are uniformly characterised by thorough scholarship and unfailing sense. The 
notes resemble rather those of Lightfoot than those of Ellicott. ... It is a pleasure to 
welcome a book which does credit to English learning, and which will take, and keep, a 
foremost place in Biblical literature." 

SCOTSMAN. — " It is a work which sums up many others, and to any one who wishes 
to make a thorough study of the Epistle of St. James, it will prove indispensable." 

EXPOSITOR (^x. MarcusDods).— "Will longremain the commentary on St. James, 
a storehouse to which all subsequent students of the epistle must be indebted." 

The Epistles of St. Jolm— 

THE EPISTLES OF ST. JOHN. By F. D. Maurice. Crown 

Svo. 3s. 6d. 
THE EPISTLES OF ST. JOHN. The Greek Text, with Notes. 

By Right Rev. Bishop Westcott, 3rd Edition. Svo. 12s. 6d. 

GUARDIAN. — " It contains a new or rather revised text, with careful critical remarks 
and helps ; very copious footnotes on the text ; and after each of the chapters, 
longer and more elaborate notes in treatment of leading or difficult questions, whether in 
respect of reading or theology. . . . Dr. Westcott has accumulated round them so much 
matter that, if not new, was forgotten, or generally unobserved, and has thrown so much 
light upon their language, theology, and characteristics. . . . The notes, critical, 
illustrative, and exegetical, which are given beneath the text, are extraordinarily full and 
careful. . . . They exhibit the same minute analysis of every phrase and word, the same 
scrupulous weighing of every inflection and variation that characterised Dr. Westcott's 
commentary on the Gospel. . . . There is scarcely a syllable throughout the Epistles 
which is dismissed without having undergone the most anxious interrogation." 

SA TURD A y REVIEW. — The more we examine this precious volume the more 
its exceeding richness in spiritual as well as in literary material grows upon the mind." 

The Epistle to the Hebrews — 

ENGLISH. With Notes. By Rev. F. Rendall. Cr. Svo. 6s. 
THE EPISTLE TO THE HEBREWS. English Text, with Com- 
mentary. By the same. Crown Svo. 7s. 6d. 
Rev. C. J. Vaughan. Crown Svo. 7s. 6d. 
TIMES. — "The name and reputation of the Dean of Llandaff are a better recom- 
mendation than we can give of the Epistle to the Hebrews, the Greek text, with notes ; 
an edition which represents the results of more than thirty years' experience in the training 
of students for ordination." 

Notes and Essays. By Right Rev. Bishop Westcott. Svo. 14s. 

GUARDIAN. — " In form this is a companion volume to that upon the Epistles of St. 
John. The type is excellent, the printing careful, the index thorough ; and the volume 
contains a full mtroduction, followed by the Greek text, with a running commentary, and 
a number of additional notes on verbal and doctrinal points which needed fuller discus- 
sion. . . . His conception of inspiration is further illustrated by the_ treatment of the Old 
Testament in the Epistle, and the additional notes that bear on this point deserve very 
careful study. The spirit in which the student should approach the perplexing questions 
of Old Testament criticism could not be better described than it is in the last essay." 


Tie Book of Revelations — 

THE APOCALYPSE. A Study. By the late Archbishop Ben- 
son. Svo. 8s. 6d. net. 

MlLUGAN. Crown Svo. 5s. 


SCOTSMAN. — "These discussions give an interesting and valuable account and 
criticism of the present state of theological opinion and research in connection with their 

SCOTTISH GUARDIAN.—" The great merit of the book is the patient and skilful 
way in which it has brought the whole discussion down to the present day. . . . The 
result is a volume which many will value highly, and which will not, we thmk, soon be 

Rev. C. J. Vaughan. 5th Edition. Crown Svo. ids. 6d. 

APOCALYPSE. By Edward Carus Selwyn, D.D. Crown 
Svo. 6s. net. 

THE BIBLE WORD-BOOK. By ^V. Aldis Wright, Litt.D., 
LL.D. 2nd Edition. Crown Svo. 7s. 6d. 

Cbristian Cburcb, Ibiston? of tbe 

CLeetham (Archdeacon).— A HISTORY OF THE CHRISTIAN 
Svo. los. 6d. 

TIMES.—" A brief but authoritative summary of early ecclesiastical history." _ 
GLASGOIV HERALD.—" Particularly clear in its exposition, systematic in its dis- 
position and development, and as light and attractive in style as could reasonably be 
expected from the nature of the subject." 

Illustrative of Church History to the Time of Constantine. 2nd 
Edition. Revised and Enlarged. Cr. Svo. 4s. 6d. net. 

To this edition have been prefixed short accounts of the writers 
from whom the passages are selected. 
Hardwick (Archdeacon).-A HISTORY OF THE CHRISTIAN 
CHURCH. Middle Age. Ed. by Bishop Stubbs. Cr. Svo. ios. 6d. 
REFORMATION. Revised by Bishop Stubbs. Cr. Svo. los. 6d. 
Hort (Dr. F. J. A.)— TWO DISSERTATIONS. I. On 
MONOPEXHS eEOS in Scripture and Tradition. II. On the 
"Constantinopolitan" Creed and other Eastern Creeds of the 
Fourth Century. Svo. 7s. 6d. 
THE CHRISTIAN ECCLESIA. A Course of Lectures on the 
Early History and Early Conceptions of the Ecclesia, and Four 
Sermons. Crown Svo. 6s. 


8vo. 8s. 6d. net. 

CHRISTIAN CHURCH. Fcap. Svo. 3s. 6d. 

Translated by Miss May Sinclair. With a Preface by Prof. H. 
M. GwATKiN, M.A. Crown Svo. 3s. 6d. 

MANCHESTER GUARDIAN.—" It fully deserves the praise given to it by Pro- 
fessor Gwatkin (who contributes a preface to this translation) of being ' neither a meagre 
sketch nor a confused mass of facts, but a masterly outline," and it really ' supplies a 
want,' as afifording to the intelligent reader who has no time or interest in details, a con- 
nected general view of the whole vast field of ecclesiastical history." 

Vaughan (Very Rev. C. J., Dean of Llandaff).— THE CHURCH 
OF THE FIRST DAYS. The Church of Jerusalem. The 
Church of the Gentiles. The Church of the World. 
Crown Svo. los. 6d. 

Zhz Cburcb of i6nglanb 

Catechism of— 

Aldous. Pott Svo. IS. net. 

THOSE HOLY MYSTERIES. By Rev. J. C. P. Aldous. Pott 
Svo. Is. net. 

OF ENGLAND. By Rev. Canon Maclear. Pott Svo. is. 6d. 

CHURCH OF ENGLAND, with Scripture Proofs for Junior 
Classes and Schools. By the same. Pott Svo. 6d. 

THE ORDER OF CONFIRMATION, with Prayers and Devo- 
tions. By the Rev. Canon Maclear. 32mo. 6d. 

Rev. C. J. Vaughan, D.D. Pott Svo. is. 6d. 

Disestablishment — 

they? By Prof. E. A. Freeman. 4th Edition. Crown Svo. is. 

DISESTABLISHMENT. By Roundell, Earl of Selborne. 
Crown Svo. 2S. 6d. 

AND TITHES. By the same. 2nd Edition. Crown Svo. 7s. 6d. 

Bishop of St. Asaph. 3rd Edition. Fcap. Svo. Sewed, 6d. 
Dissent in its Relation to — 

LAND. By Rev. G. II. CuRTEis. Bampton Lectures for 1S71. 
Crown Svo. 7s. 6d. 


History of — 

the Dean of Winchester. In Seven Volumes. 

Hunt, M.A. Cr. 8vo. 7s. 6d. [Jieaify. 

TEENTH CENTURY. By the Dean of Winchester. 
Cr. 8vo. 7s. 6d. lj?eady. 

By the Rev. Canon Capes, sometime Reader of Ancient 
History in the University of Oxford. 7s. 6d. [Jieady. 

Other Volumes to follow. 

Elliot. New Edition. Crown Svo. is. 6d. 

HISTORY. Compiled from Original Sources by Henry Gee, 
B.D., F.S.A., and W. J. Hardy, F.S.A. Cr. Svo. los. 6d. 

■ENGLISH HISTORICAL REVIEW.—" Will be welcomed alike by students and 
Dy a much wider circle of readers interested in the history of the Church of England. 
For the benefit of the latter all the Latin pieces have been translated into English. . . . 
It fully deserves the hearty imprimatur of the Bishop of Oxford prefixed to it." 

DAILY CHRONICLE. — " Students of the English Constitution as well as students 
of Church History will find this volume a valuable aid to their researches." 

SCOTTISH GUARDIAN. — " There is no book in existence that contains so much 
original material likely to prove valuable to those who wish to investigate ritual or 
historical questions affecting the English Church." 

Holy Commuiiioii — 

CORIMON PRAYER, with Select Readings from the Writings 
of the Rev. F. D. Maurice. Edited by Bishop Colenso. 6th 
Edition. l6mo. 2s. 6d. 

FIRST COMMUNION, with Prayers and Devotions for the newly 
Confirmed. By Rev. Canon Maclear. 32mo. 6d. 

FIRST COMMUNION, with Prayers and Devotions. By the 
same. 32mo. 2S. 

LituTgy — 


B.D. Crown Svo. 4s. 6d. 
Maclear. Pott Svo. 3s. 6d. 

CHURCH QUARTERL Y REVIEW.—" Mr. Maclear's text-books of Bible history 
are so well known that to praise them is unnecessary. He has now added to them An 
Introdtiction to t!u Creeds, which we do not hesitate to call admirable. The_ book 
consists first, of an historical introduction, occupying 53 pages, then an exposition of 
the twelve articles of the Creed extending to page 299, an appendix containing the texts 
of a considerable number of Creeds, and lastly, three indices which, as far as we have 
tested them we must pronounce very good. ... We may add that we know akeady 
that the book has been used with great advantage in ordinary parochial work. 


Liturgy — continued. 

CHURCH OF ENGLAND. By Rev. G. F. Maclear, D.D., 
and Rev. W. W. Williams. Crown 8vo. los. 6d. 

The Bishop of Salisbury at the Church Congress, spoke of this as " a book which 
will doubtless have, as it deserves, large circulation." 

ST. JAMES'S GAZETTB.—" Theological students and others will find this com- 
prehensive yet concise volume most valuable." 

GLASGOW HERALD.— " K valuable addition to the well-known series of Theo- 
logical Manuals published by Messrs. Macmillan." 

CHURCH TIMES. — " Those who are in any way responsible for the training of 
candidates for Holy Orders must often have felt the want of such a book as Dr. Maclear, 
with the assistance of his colleague, Mr. Williams, has just published." 

With a rationale of its Offices on the basis of the former Work by 
Francis Procter, M.A. Revised and re- written by Walter 
HoviTARD Frere, M.A., Priest of the Community of the Resur- 
rection. Crown 8vo. I2S. 6d. 

COMMON PRAYER. By Rev. F. Procter and Rev. Canon 
Maclear. Pott 8vo. 2s. 6d. 

ENGLAND. By Very Rev. C. J. Vaughan. 4th Edition. 
Fcap. 8vo. 6s. 

Historical and Biographical — 

Hulsean Lectures, 1894-95. By Alfred Barry, D.D., D.C.L., 
formerly Bishop of Sydney and Primate of Australia and Tasmania. 
Crown 8vo. 6s. 

The author's preface says : " The one object of these lectures — delivered 
on the Hulsean Foundation in 1894-95 — is to make some slight contribu- 
tion to that awakening of interest in the extraordinary religious mission of 
England which seems happily characteristic of the present time." 

DAILY NEWS. — " These lectures are particularly interesting as containing the case 
for the Christian missions at a time when there is a disposition to attack them in some 

St. Augustine to Juxon. By the Very Rev. Walter Farquhar 
Hook, D.D., Dean of Chichester. Demy 8vo. The volumes sold 
separately as follows: — Vol. I., 15s. ; Vol. II., 15s. ; Vol. V., 
15s. ; Vols. VI. and VII., 30s. ; Vol. VIH., 15s. ; Vol. X., 
15s. ; Vol. XL, 15s. ; Vol. XII., 15s. 
ATHENAEUM.— "The most impartial, the most instructive, and the most intereiit' 
ing of histories." 


Historical and BiograpMcal — continued. 

FARQUHAR HOOK, D.D. By the Very Rev. W. R. W. 
Stephens, F.S.A., Dean of Winchester. Crown 8vo. 7th Edi- 
tion. With Portrait. 6s. 

Son. Two Vols. 8vo! 36s. net. 

Abridged Edition. In one Vol. 8s. 6d. net. 

By E. S. PURCELL. Two Vols. 8vo. 25s. net. 

THE OXFORD MOVEMENT. Twelve Years, 1833-45. By 
Dean Church. Globe 8vo. 5s. 

of St. Paul's. Globe 8vo. 5s. 

JAMES ERASER, Second Bishop of Manchester. A Memoir. 
1818-1885. By Thomas Hughes, Q.C. 2nd Ed. Crown 8vo. 6s. 


HORT, D.D., D.C.L., LL.D., sometime Hulsean Professor and 

Lady Margaret's Reader in Divinity in the University of Cambridge. 

By his Son, Arthur Fenton Hort, late Fellow of Trinity College, 

Cambridge. In two Vols. With Portrait. Ex. Cr. 8vo. 17s. net. 

EXPOSITOR. — " It is only just to publish the life of a scholar at once so well known 

and so little known as Dr. Hort. . . . But all who appreciate his work wish to know more, 

and the two fascinating volumes edited by his son give us the information we seek. They 

reveal to us a man the very antipodes of a dry-as-dust pedant, a man with many interests 

and enthusiasms, a lover of the arts and of nature, an athlete and one of the founders of the 

Alpine Club, a man of restless mind but always at leisure for the demands of friendship, 

and finding his truest joy in his own home and family." 

told in his own letters. Edited by his Son, Frederick Maurice. 
With Portraits. Two Vols. Crown 8vo. 1 6s. 

1865. ByRouNDELL, Earl of Selborne. With Portraits and 
Illustrations. Two Vols. 8vo. (PART II.) PERSONAL 
AND POLITICAL, 1865-1895. Two Vols. 25s. net. 


Canterbury. By Randall Thomas, Bishop of Winchester, 

and William Benham, B.D., Hon. Canon of Canterbury. With 

Portraits. 3rd Edition. Two Vols. Crown 8vo. los. net. 


Dean of Lincoln, sometime Vicar of Wantage. 8vo. 12s. 6d. net. 

TIMES — " We have a graphic picture of a strong personality, and the example of 

a useful and laboiious life. . . . Well put together and exceedingly interestuig to 


BURY. Read and others v. The Lord Bishop of Lincoln. 
Judgment, Nov. 21, 1890. 2nd Edition. Svo. 2s. net. 


OF THE SACRAMENT. Lambeth Palace, May i, 1900, 
8vo. Sewed, is. net. 

SACRAMENT. Lambeth Palace, May 1, 1900. 8vo. Sewed. 
IS. net. 

(No. I, October 1899). Yearly Volumes. 14s. net. 


JEWISH QUARTERLY REVIEW. Edited by I. Abrahams and 
C. G. MoNTEFiORE. Demy 8vo. 3s. 6d. Vols. 1-7, 12s. 6d. 
each. Vol. 8 onwards, 15s. each. (Annual Subscription, lis.) 

2)evotional Boo 1^0 

Cornish (J. F.)— WEEK BY WEEK. Fcap. 8vo. 3s. 6d. 

SPECTA TOR. — *'They are very terse and excellent verses, generally on the subject 
of either the Epistle or Gospel for the day, and are put with the kind of practical vigour 
which arrests attention and compels the conscience to face boldly some leading thought in 
the passage selected." 

SATURDAY REVIEW.— '^ThG. studied simplicity of Mr. Cornish's verse is al- 
together opposed to what most hymn -writers consider to be poetry. Nor is this the 
only merit of his unpretentious volume. There is a tonic character in the exhortation 
and admonition that characterise the hymns, and the prevailing sentiment is thoroughly 
manly and rousing." 

TO MY SISTER-MOURNERS. Crown 8vo. 2s. 6d. 

A THENj^UM. — " Tender and unobtrusive, and the author thoroughly realises the 
sorrow of those she addresses ; it may soothe mourning readers, and can by no means 
aggravate or jar upon their feelings." 

CONTEMPORARY REVIEW.— " touching and at the same time a very 
sensible book. It breathes throughout the truest Christian spirit." 

NONCONFORMIST.— " A. beautiful little volume, written with gemiine feeling, 
good taste, and a right appreciation of the teaching of Scripture relative to sorrow and 

IMITATIO CHRISTI, Libri IV. Printed in Borders after Holbein, 
Diirer, and other old Masters, containing Dances of Death, Acts of 
Mercy, Emblems, etc. Crown 8vo. 7s. 6d. 

Keble (J.)— THE CHRISTIAN YEAR. Edited by C. M. 

YoNGE. Pott 8vo. 2s. 6d. net. 
Kingsley (Charles). — OUT OF THE DEEP: WORDS 

FOR THE SORROWFUL. From the writings of Charles 

Kingsley. Extra fcap. 8vo. 3s. 6d. 
DAILY THOUGHTS. Selected from the Writings of Charles 

Kingsley. By his Wife. Crown 8vo. 6s. 
FROM DEATH TO LIFE. Fragments of Teaching to a Village 

Congregation. With Letters on the "Life after Death." Edited 

by his Wife. Fcap. 8vo. 2s. 6d. 


Maclear (Rev. Canon). — A MANUAL OF INSTRUCTION 
PRAYERS AND DEVOTIONS. 32mo. 2s. '''^'^'^' ^^^" 


BURIAL OF THE DEAd! 32A10. 2s. ^'''''■'^^ "^^^ ^"^ 

Maurice (Frederick Denison).— LESSONS OF HOPE. Readings 

from the Works of F. D. Maurice. Selected by Rev. T Ll 

Davies, M.A. Crown 8vo. 5s. j j ■ 

THE COMMUNION SERVICE. From the Book of Common 

Prayer, with select readings from the writings of the Rev. F. D. 

Maurice, M.A. Edited by the Rev. John William Colenso, 

D.D., Lord Bishop of Natal. i6mo. 2s. 6d. 

By Frederick Denison Maurice and others. Fcap. 8vo. 3s. 6d. 

Very Rev. C. J. Vaughan, D.D. New Edition. Pott 8vo. 3s. 6d. 

Welby- Gregory (The Hon. Lady).— LINKS AND CLUES. 
2nd Edition. Crown 8vo. 6s. 

Westcott (Rt. Rev. B. F., Bishop of Durham).— THOUGHTS 
ON REVELATION AND LIFE. Selections from the Writings 
of Bishop Westcott. Edited by Rev. S. Phillips. Crown 8vo. 6s. 

^be jfatbers 


Benson (Archbishop).— CYPRIAN : HIS LIFE, HIS TIMES, 
HIS W^ORK. By the late Edward White Benson, Archbishop 
of Canterbury. Svo. 
TIMES. — " In all essential respects, in sobriety of judgment and temperj in sym- 
pathetic insight into character, in firm grasp of historical and ecclesiastical issues, In 
scholarship and erudition, the finished work is worthy of its subject and worthy of its 
author. ... In its main outlines full of dramatic insight and force, and in its details full 
of the fruits of ripe learning, sound judgment, a lofty Christian temper, and a mature 
ecclesiastical wisdom," 

SATURDAY REVIEW. — "On the whole, and with all reservations which can 
possibly be made, this weighty volume is a contribution to criticism and learning on 
which we can but congratulate the Anglican Church. We wish more of her bishops were 
capable or desirous of descending into that arena of pure intellect from which Dr. Benson 
returns with these posthumous laurels." 

OF CONSTANTINE. 2nd Edition. Crown Svo. 4s. 6d. net. 

FATHERS. Crown 8vo. 3s. 6d. 

TIMES. "Though certainly popular in form and treatment thejj are so in the best 

sense of the words, and they bear throughout the impress of the ripe scholarship the 
rare critical acumen, and the lofty ethical temper which marked all Dr. Hort's work." 


Hort (F. J. A.) — continued. 

CLEMENTINE RECOGNITIONS. Crown 8vo. [/« the Press. 
RINUS. 8vo. [/» the Press. 

8s. 6d. net. 

Lightfoot (Bishop).— THE APOSTOLIC FATHERS. Part I. 
St. Clement of Rome. Revised Texts, with Introductions, 
Notes, Dissertations, and Translations. 2 vols. 8vo. 32s. 

THE APOSTOLIC FATHERS. Part II. St. Ignatius to St. Poly- 
carp. Revised Texts, with Introductions, Notes, Dissertations, and 
Translations. 3 vols. 2nd Edition. Demy 8vo. 48s. 

THE APOSTOLIC FATHERS. Abridged Edition. With Short 
Introductions, Greek Text, and English Translation. 8vo. 16s. 

MANCHESTER GUARDIAN. — "A coDspectus of these early and intensely in- 
teresting Christian ' Documents ' such as had not hitherto been attainable, and thereby 
renders a priceless service to all serious students of Christian theology, and even of 
Roman history." 

NA TIONAL OBSER VER. — " From the account of its contents, the student may 
appreciate the value of this last work of a great scholar, and its helpfulness as an aid to 
an intelligent examination of the earliest post-Apostolic writers. The texts are con- 
structed on the most careful collation of all the existing sources. The introductions are 
brief, lucid, and thoroughly explanatory of the historic^ and critical questions related to 
the texts. The introduction to the Didacht, and the translation of the ' Chiurch Manual 
of Early Christianity,' are peculiarly interesting, as giving at once an admirable version 
of it, and the opinion of the first of English biblical critics on the latest discovery in 
patristic literature." 



Being Studies of the Benedictus, Magnificat, Gloria in Excelsis, 

and Nunc Dimittis. Crown 8vo. S^- 
Brooke (S. A.)— CHRISTIAN HYMNS. Edited and arranged. 

Fcap. 8vo. 2S. 6d. net. 
Selbome (RoundeU, Earl of) — 

THE BOOK OF PRAISE. From the best English Hymn Writers. 

Pott 8vo. 2S. 6d. net. 
A HYMNAL. Chiefly from The Book of Praise. In various sizes. 

B. Pott 8vo, larger type. Is. — C. Same Edition, fine paper, is. 6d. — 

An Edition with Music, Selected, Harmonised, and Composed by 

John Hullah. Pott 8vo. 3s. 6d. 

Compiled by M. A. Woods. Pott 8vo. is. 6d. 

IReliGioue ^eacbing 

ARY SCHOOLS. For Teachers and Parents. Suggestions as 
to Lessons on the Bible, Early Church History, Christian Evidences, 
etc. By the Rev. G. C. Bell, M.A., Master of Marlborough 


College. 2nd Edition. With new chapter on Christian Ethic. 
Crown 8vo. 3s. 6d. 

GUARDIAN.—*^ The hints and suggestions given are admirable, and, as far as Bible 
teaching or instruction in * Christian Evidences ' is concerned, leave nothing to be desired. 
Much time and thought has evidently been devoted by the writer to the difficulties which 
confront the teacher of the Old Testament, and a large portion of the volume is taken up 
with the consideration of this branch of his subject." 

EDUCATIONAL REVIEW.— ''Yor those teachers who are dissatisfied with the 
existing state of things, and who are striving after something better, this little handbook 
is invaluable. Its aim is 'to map out a course of instruction on practical lines, and to 
suggest methods and books which may point the way to a higher standpoint and a wider 
horizon.' For the carrying out of this, and also for his criticism of prevailing methods, 
all teachers owe Mr. Bell a debt of gratitude ; and if any are roused to a due sense of 
their responsibility in this matter, he will feel that his book has not been written in vain." 

Palmer (Florence U.)— ONE YEAR OF SUNDAY SCHOOL 
the Youngest Classes. Pott 4to. 4s. 6d. 

Sermons, Xccturce, Hbbressea, an& 
^beoIoQtcal lEsaai^s 

(See also 'Bible,' ' Church of England,' ' Fathers') 

GUARDIAN. — "This is a book which, in our opinion, demands the most serious 
and earnest attention." 

Abbott (Rev. E. A.)— 


OXFORD SERMONS. 8vo. 7s. 6d. 

PHILOMYTHUS. An Antidote against Credulity. A discussion 
of Cardinal Newman's Essay on Ecclesiastical Miracles. 2nd 
Edition. Crown 8vo. 3s. 6d. 

I2S. 6d. net. 
Abrahams (I.)-Monteiore (C. G.)-ASPECTS OF JUDAISM. 
Being Sixteen Sermons. 2nd Edition, Fcap. 8vo. 3s. 6d. net. 

■rrMF^ -'■ There is a great deal in them that does not appeal to Jews alone, for, 
«ilci2i? in llr Montefior?s addresses, the doctrines advocated with much charm of 
ST, «e often not by any means exclusively Jewish, but such as are shared and 
h^nourt^ by al" who care for religion and morality as those terms are commonly under- 

''^ClT^GoTZTaLV.--'- Bo^^ from the homiletic and what may be called the 
big woVld^iut of view, this little volume is one of considerable mterest. 

Aineer (Rev. Alfred, Master of the Temple). — SERMONS 
8vo. 6s. 



HOLINESS. Crown 8vo. 6s. 

THE SPECTA TOR.—" A well-reasoned and really noble view of the essential pur- 
pose of the Christian revelation. . , . We hope that Mr. Askwith's work will be widely 

Bather (Archdeacon).— ON SOME MINISTERIAL DUTIES, 
CATECHISING, PREACHING, etc. Edited, with a Preface, 
by Very Rev. C. J. Vaughan, D.D. Fcap. 8vo. 4s. 6d. 

Beeching (Rev. H. C.).— INNS OF COURT SERMONS. 

[/« the Press- 
Benson (Archbishop) — 

BOY-LIFE : its Trial, its Strength, its Fulness. Sundays in 

Wellington College, 1859-73. ^'^ Edition. Crown 8vo. 6s. 
CHRIST AND HIS TIMES. Addressed to the Diocese of Canter- 
bury in his Second Visitation. Crown 8vo. 6s. 
FISHERS OF MEN. Addressed to the Diocese of Canterbury in 
his Third Visitation. Crown 8vo. 6s. 
GUARDIAN. — "There is plenty of plain speaking in the addresses before us, and 
they contain many wise and thoughtful counsels on subjects of the day." 

TIMES. — "With keen insight and sagacious counsel, the Archbishop surveys the 
condition and prospects of the church." 


Sermons and Addresses. Edited by J. H. Bernard. Crown 

8vo. 3s. 6d. 

PALL MALL GAZETTE. — "No words of mine could appreciate, or do justice 
to, the stately language and lofty thoughts of the late Primate ; they will appeal to 
every Churchman." 


[/» the Press. 

(2) AS IN USE IN THE CHURCH. Crown 8vo. ss. 

To use the words of its author, this book is offered "to readers of 
Scripture as expository of a distinct portion of the Holy Word ; to wor- 
shippers in the congregation as a devotional commentary on the hymns 
which they use ; to those keeping Christmas, as a contribution to the ever- 
welcome thoughts of that blessed season ; to all Christian people who, in 
the midst of the historical elaboration of Christianity, find it good to re- 
enter from time to time the clear atmosphere of its origin, and are fain in 
the heat of the day to recover some feeling of the freshness of dawn. " 

GLASGOW HERALD. — " He conveys much useful information in a scholarly way." 

SCOTSMAN. — " Their meaning and their relationships, the reasons why the Church 

has adopted them, and many other kindred points, are touched upon in the book with so 

well-explained a learning and with so much insight that the book will be highly valued 

by those interested in its subject." 

Boutflower (C. H., Chaplain to the Bishop of Durham). — EIGHT 
AYSGARTH SCHOOL SERMONS. Fcap. 8vo. 2s. 6d. 

Brooke (Rev. Stopford A.).— SHORT SERMONS. Cr. Svo. 6s. 


Brooks (Phillips, late Bishop of Massachusetts)— 

THE CANDLE OF THE LORD, and other Sermons. Crown 8vo. 


oVO. OS. 

TWENTY SERMONS. Crown 8vo. 6s. 

THE LIGHT OF THE WORLD. Crown 8vo. 3s. 6d. 


SOCIAL. Edited by the Rev. John Cotton Brooks. Crown 
8vo. 8s. 6d. net. 

8vo. 6s. 

WESTMINSTER GAZETTE.-" K\\ characterised by that fervent piety, catho- 
licity of spirit, and fine command of language for which the Bishop was famous." 

Allen. 3 vols. 8vo. 30s. net. 

Bninton (Sir T. Lauder). — THE BIBLE AND SCIENCE. 
With Illustrations. Crown 8vo. los. 6d. 

Campbell (Dr. John M'Leod) — 

THE NATURE OF THE ATONEMENT. 6th Ed. Cr. 8vo. 6s. 

Introductory Narrative, by his Son, DoNALD Campbell, M.A. 
Crown 8vo. 7s. 6d. 

THOUGHTS ON REVELATION. 2nd Edition. Crown Svo. 55. 

Compiled from Sermons preached at Row, in the years 1829-31. 
Crown Svo. Js. 

Canterbury (Frederick, Archbishop of) — 


SCHOOL. Extra Fcap. Svo. 4s. 6d. 
SECOND SERIES. 3rd Ed. 6s. 
THIRD SERIES. 4th Edition. 6s. 

Bampton Lectures, 1S84. 7th and Cheaper Ed. Cr. Svo. 6s. 

Sewed. IS. net. . , _ . . 

(I) The Doctrine of the Eucharist; (2) The Practice of Confession; 
(3) Uniformity in Ceremonial ; (4) The Power of the Bishops. 


Carpenter (W. Boyd, Bishop of Ripon) — 

TRUTH IN TALE. Addresses, chiefly to Children. Crown 8vo. 
4s. 6d. 

Lectures, 1887. 2nd Edition. Crown 8vo. 6s. 

TWILIGHT DREAMS. Crown 8vo. 4s. 6d. 

LECTURES ON PREACHING. Crown 8vo. 3s. 6d. net 

TIMES. — " These Lectures on Preachings delivered a year ago in the Divinity 
School at Cambridge, are an admirable analysis of the intellectual, ethical^ spiritual, 
and rhetorical characteristics of the art of preaching. In six lectures the Bishop deals 
successfully with the preacher and his training, with the sermon and its structure, with 
the preacher and his age, and with the aim of the preacher. In each case he is practical, 
suggestive, eminently stimulating, and ' often eloquent, not with the mere splendour of 
rhetoric, but with the happy faculty of saying the right thing in well-chosen words." 

Charge to the Clergy. Crown 8vo. 3s. 6d. net. 

TIMES. — " Dr. Eoyd Carpenter treats this very difficult subject with moderation 
and good sense, and with a clear-headed perception of the limits which inexorably cir- 
cumscribe the natural aspirations of Christians of different churches and nationalities for 
a more intimate communion and fellowship." 

LEEDS MERCURY.— "Tie discusses with characteristic vigour and felicity the 
claims which hinder reunion, and the true idea and scope of catholicity." 

Cheetham (Archdeacon). — MYSTERIES, PAGAN AND 
CHRISTIAN. Being the Hulsean Lectures for 1896. Crown 
8vo. Ss. 

Churcli (Dean) — 


THE GIFTS OF CIVILISATION, and other Sermons and Lectures, 
and Edition. Crown 8vo. 7s. 6d. 

Sermons. Crown 8vo. 4s. 6d. 

ADVENT SERMONS. 1885. Crown 8vo. 4s. 6d. 

VILLAGE SERMONS. Crown 8vo. 6s. 

VILLAGE SERMONS. Second Series. Crown 8vo. 6s. 

VILLAGE SERMONS. Third Series. Crown 8vo. 6s. 

TIMES. — " In these sermons we see how a singularly gifted and cultivated mind was 
able to communicate its thoughts on the highest subjects to those with whom it might 
be supposed to have little in common. . . . His village sermons are not the by-work of 
one whose interests were elsewherein higher matters. They are the outcome of his 
deepest interests and of the life of his choice. . . . These sermons are worth perusal if 
only to show what preaching, even to the humble and unlearned hearers, may be made 
in really competent hands." 


^ TIMES. — "They are all eminently characteristic of one of the most saintly of modern 
divines, and one of the most scholarly of modern men of letters." 


SP£CTATOi!.—"Dc!iLa Church's seem to us the finest sermons published since 
Newman's, even Dr. Liddon's rich and eloquent discourses not excepted,— and they 
breathe more of the spirit of perfect peace than even Newman's. They cannot be called 
High Church or Broad Church, much less Low Church sermons ; they are simply the 
sermons of a good scholar, a great thinker, and a firm and serene Christian." 

APOSTLES' CREED. Extra fcap. 8vo. is. 6d. 

A CONFESSION OF FAITH. By an Unorthodox Believer. 
Fcap. 8vo. 3s. 6d. 

GRAPHIC. — "The hook not only abounds with spiritual charm and metaphysical 
insight, but it is an excellent specimen of good hard thinking and close reasoning, in which 
the reader will find plenty of capital exercise for the intellectual muscles." 

Congreve (Rev. John).— HIGH HOPES AND PLEADINGS 
LARGER CHARITY. Crown 8vo. 55. 

Cooke (Josiah P.) — 

FAITH. 8vo. 8s. 6d. net. 

CHRISTIAN BELIEF. The Boyle Lectures, 1884. Cr. 8vo. 6s. 

Davidson (R. T., Bishop of Winchester)— A CHARGE DE- 
ROCHESTER, October 29, 30, 31, 1894. 8vo. Sewed. 

DIOCESE OF WINCHESTER, Sept. 28, 30, Oct. 2, 3, 4, 
and 5, 1899. 8vo. Sewed. 2s. 6d. net. 

Davies (Rev. J. Llewelyn) — 

THE GOSPEL AND MODERN LIFE. 2nd Edition, to which is 
added Morality according to the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper. 
Extra fcap. 8vo. 6s. 
CHRISTIAN THEOLOGY. 2nd Edition. Crown 8yo. 6s. 

WARNINGS AGAINST SUPERSTITION. Extra fcap. 8 vo. 2s. 6d. 
THE CHRISTIAN CALLING. Extra fcap. 8vo. 6s. 

as interpreted by their Outward Signs. Three Addresses. New 

Edition. Pott 8vo. is. 



Davies (Rev. J. Llewelyn) — continued. 

GLASGOW HERALD.—" This is a wise and suggestive book, touching upon many 
of the more interesting questions of the present day. ... A book as full of hope as it is 
of ability." 

MANCHESTER GUARDIAN.—" He says what he means, but never more than 
he means ; and hence his words carry weight with many to whom the ordinary sermon 
would appeal in vain. . . . The whole book is well worth study." 

ABERDEEN DAIL Y FREE PRESS.— " An able discussion of the true basis and 
aim of social progress." 

SCOTSMAN.— "Thoughtful and suggestive." 

SPIRITUAL APPREHENSION: Sermons and Papers. Crown 
8vo. 6s. 


Discourse addressed to Advanced Religious Thinkers on Christian 

Lines. By Wm. Davies. Fcap. 8vo. 3s. 6d. 

CHRISTIAN WORLD.— "Vfe hail this work as one which in an age of much 
mental unrest sounds a note of faith which appeals confidently to the highest intellect, 
inasmuch as it springs out of the clearest intuitions of the human spirit." 

Ellerton (Rev. John).— THE HOLIEST MANHOOD, AND 

English Theological Library. Edited by Rev. Frederic 
Relton. With General Introduction by the late Lord Bishop of 
London. A Series of Texts Annotated for the Use of Students, 
Candidates for Ordination, etc. 8vo. 

by Rev. Ronald E. Bayne. [Heady Shortly. 

II. LAW'S SERIOUS CALL, Edited by Rev. Canon J. H. Overton. 
8s. 6d. net. 

DAILY NEWS. — "A well-executed reprint. . . . Canon Overton's notes are not 
numerous, and are as a rule very interesting and useful." 

CAMBRIDGE REVIEW.— " K welcome reprint. _. . . All that it should be in 
paper and appearance, and the reputation of the editor is a guarantee for the accuracy 
and fairness of the notes." 

HI. WILSON'S MAXIMS, Edited by Rev. F. Relton. Ss. 6d. net. 

GUARDIAN. — "Many readers will feel grateful to Mr. Relton for this edition of 
Bishop Wilson's ' Maxims.' . . . Mr. Relton's edition will be found well worth posses- 
sing : it is pleasant to the eye, and bears legible marks of industry and study." 

EXPOSITORY TIMES.— " In an introduction of some twenty pages, he tells us 
all we need to know of Bishop Wilson and of his maxims. Then he gives us the maxims 
themselves in most perfect form, and schools himself to add at the bottom of the page 
such notes as are absolutely necessary to their understanding, and nothing more." 

Charges, Fragments, and Corresjriondence. Vol. II. The Analogy 
of Religion, and two brief dissertations : I. Of Personal Identity. 
II. Of the Nature of Virtue. Edited by J. H. Bernard, D.D. 
7s. 6d. net each. 

THE PILOT. — " One could hardly desire a better working edition than this which 
Dr. Bernard has given us. . . . Sure to become the standard edition for students. " 
THE SPECTATOR.— " An excellent piece of work." 


English Theological Library — continued. 

MR. FISHER, THE JESUIT. Edited by Rev. C. H. SlMP- 
KINSON, M.A. Author of The Life of Archbisliop Land. 

[Ln the Press. 
[Other volumes are in preparation.'] 

EVIL AND EVOLUTION. An attempt to turn the Light of Modern 
Science on to the Ancient Mystery of Evil. By the author of 
T/ie Social Horizon. Crown 8vo. 3s. 6d. net. 
EXPOSITORY TIMES.— "T^ithooVis well worth the interest it is almost certain 
to excite." 

CHURCH TIMES. — " There can be no question about the courage or the keen 
logic and the lucid style of this fascinating treatment of a problem which is of pathetic 
interest to all of us. ... It deserves to be studied by all, and no one who reads it can 
fail to be struck by it." 

FAITH AND CONDUCT : An Essay on Verifiable Religion. Crown 
8vo. 7s. 6d. 

Farrar (Very Rev. F. W., Dean of Canterbury) — 

Lectures, 1885. 8vo. i6s. 

Collected Edition of the Sermons, etc. Cr. 8vo. 3s. 6d. each. 


ETERNAL HOPE. Sermons Preached in Westminster Abbey. 

THE FALL OF MAN, and other Sermons. 



IN THE DAYS OF THY YOUTH. Sermons on Practical Subjects. 

SAINTLY WORKERS. Five Lenten Lectures. 

EPHPHATHA : or. The Amelioration of the World. 

MERCY AND JUDGMENT. A few words on Christian Eschatology. 

SERMONS AND ADDRESSES delivered in America. 

OF HIS ORIGIN. Crown 8vo. 3s. 6d. 

Foxell (VV. J.)— GOD'S GARDEN : Sunday Talks with Boys. 
With an Introduction by Dean Farrar. Globe 8vo. 3s. 6d. 
SPEAKER.-"Vlz7is. with obvious problems of faith and conduct in a strain of 
viiToroursinrplicitv and with an evident knowledge of the needs, the moods, the diffi- 
Ss of boy-life '^ It is the kind of book which instils lessons of courage, trust, pafence, 
and forbear Jnce ; and does so quite as much by example as by precept. 

IN A PLAIN PATH. Addresses to Boys. Globe 8vo. 3s. 6d. 

';PFAKER -" He handles with admirable vigour, and real discernment of a boy's 
difficS-hhi^^Lhemesastheu ofi b^^ 

Fraser (Bishop). -UNIVERSITY SERMONS. Edited by 
Rev. Joii.N' W. DiGGLE. Crown Svo. 6s. 


Furse (Archdeacon).— A NATIONAL CHURCH. 8vo. 6d. 

TIME OF JESUS : A Study in the Historical Development of 
the Foreshadowings of the' Christ in the Old Testament and 
beyond. Crown 8vo. 6s. 

Grane (W. L.)— THE WORD AND THE WAY: or, The 
Light of the Ages on the Path of To-Day. Crown 8vo. 6s. 
and Method of the Master. Second Edition. Crown 8vo. Ss. 

CREEDS OF CHRISTENDOM. Seven Lectures dehvered 
in 1898 at Regent's Park College. Crown 8vo. 6s. 

Harcourt (SirW. V.).— LAWLESSNESS in the NATIONAL 
CHURCH. 8vo. Sewed, is. net. 

Hardwick (Archdeacon). — CHRIST AND OTHER MAS- 
TERS, 6th Edition. Crown 8vo. los. 6d. 

Hare (Julius Charles)— THE MISSION OF THE COM- 
FORTER. New Edition. Edited by Dean Plumptre. Crown 
8vo. 7s. 6d. 

Harris (Rev. G. C.) — SERMONS. With a Memoir by 
Charlotte M. Yonge, and Portrait. Extra fcap. 8vo. 6s. 

Henson (Canon H. H.)— SERMON ON THE DEATH OF 
THE QUEEN. 8vo. Sewed, is. net. 

MODERN LIFE. A Study of the New Problems of the Church 
in American Society. Crown 8vo. 6s. 

Hulsean Lectures, 1871. Crown 8vo. 6s. 
CAMBRIDGE REVIEW.—" Only to few is it given to scan the wide fields of truth 
with clear vision of near and far alike. To what an extraordinary degree the late Dr. 
Hort possessed this power is shown by the Hulsean Lectures just published. They carry 
us in the most wonderful way to the very centre of the Christian system ; no aspect of 
truth, no part of the world, seems to be left out of view ; while in every page we recog- 
nise the gathered fruits of a rare scholarship in the service of an unwearying thought." 


SCOTSMAN. — "The great merit of Dr. Hort's lectures is that succinctly and yet 
fully, and in a clear and interesting and suggestive manner, they give us not only his own 
opinions, but whatever of worth has been advanced on the subject." 

GLASGOW HERALD.— "WW\ receive a respectful welcome at the hands of all 
biblical scholars. ... A model of exact and patient scholarship, controlled by robust 
English sagacity, and it is safe to say that it will take a high place in the literature of the 

VILLAGE SERMONS. Crown 8vo. 6s. 

Selected from the Sermons preached by Professor Hort to his 
village congregation at St. Ippolyt's, and including a series of 
Sermons dealing in a broad and suggestive way with the successive 
books of the Bible, from Genesis to Revelations. 


Hort (F. J. A.) — continued. 


Village Sermons). Crown 8vo. 3s. 6d. 

Contents : I. The Prayer Book, 16 Sermons. II. Baptism, 

5 Sermons. III. Mutual Subjection the Rule of Life (Eph. v. 21), 

6 Sermons. IV. The Sermon on the Mount (St. Matt. v. i ; vii. 
29), 1 1 Sermons. V. Advent, 4 Sermons. VI. The Armour of 
the Cross. VII. The Resurrection, 7 Sermons. 

Hughes (T.)— THE MANLINESS OF CHRIST. 2nd Ed. 
Fcap. 8vo. 3s. 6d. 
GLOBE,-—" The Manliness of Christ is a species of lay sermon such as Judge Hughes 
is well qualified to deliver, seeing that manliness of thought and feeling has been the 
prevailing characteristic of all his literary products." 

BRITISH WEEKLY.—" P^ new edition of a strong book." 

Hutton (R. H.)— 

Selected from the Spectator, and edited by E. M. RoscoE. Globe 
8vo. Ss. 
Crown 8vo. 6s. 
Dr. Hyde thus describes the object of his book : " This little book aims 
to point out the logical relations in which the doctrines of theology will 
stand to each other when the time shall come again for seeing Christian 
truth in the light of reason and Christian life as the embodiment of love." 

PRACTICAL IDEALISM. Globe 8vo. Ss. net. 
niingworth (Rev. J. R.)— SERMONS PREACHED IN A 
COLLEGE CHAPEL. Crown 8vo. Ss- 
1894. Crown 8vo. 6s. 
TIMES.—" Will take high rank among the rare theological masterpieces produced by 
that celebrated foundation." . . _ , c ^..\.„..„ 

EXPOSITOR.— "\l is difficult to convey an adequate impression of the freshness 

and sirength of the whole argument It is a book which no one can be satisfied with 

reading once ; it is to be studied." 

DIVINE IMMANENCE. An Essay on the Spiritual Significance 

of Matter. New Edition. Cr. Svo. 6s. 

nuljwrrr njTAUTFRLY REVIEW.— " k very valuable book. . . . Divine 

r„?ZZfue"s Uk^W to prove of^eatTervice to Christian truth. It combines, to a 

r:,;rk?bTe extentrprlLd thought and clear expression. It is -throughout written 

'°Gj"lSSi\^.-"AIt06ether, we have rarely read a book of such ph!losophicaI 
GUAKUlAlw. '?'"'K"" . . . j. 5tence in terms of the thought and 

kr:Sre%V^hes"e"d:;rsf oor^nerrriikely t°o bring home the knowledge of a S.viou, 
to the modern man." 


Jacob (Rev. J. A.) — BUILDING IN SILENCE, and other 

Sermons. Extra fcap. 8vo. 6s. 
James (Rev. Herbert).— THE COUNTRY CLERGYMAN 
AND HIS WORK. Crown 8vo. 6s. 
RECORD. — "The volume is one which should be in the hands of every candidate 
for Holy Orders and of every clergyman who is wishing to learn. " 

Jayne (F. J., Bishop of Chester).— THE VISITATION OF THE 
KINGDOM OF GOD. A Charge delivered to the Clergy of the 
Diocese at his third Visitation, October 29, 1896. 6d. 
Jellett (Rev. Dr.)— 

THE ELDER SON, and other Sermons. Crown 8vo. 6s. 
BORN CHILD. Cr. i6mo. 4s. 6d. 
Jones (Jenkin Lloyd) — 

PEL. Second Series. Crown 8vo. 6s. 

LIGHT OF THE WORLD. Crown 8vo. 7s. 6d. 

SCOTSMAN, — " Full of matter of an important kind, set forth with praiseworthy 
conciseness, and at the same time with admirable lucidity. . . . Dr. KeUogg has done 
the work allotted to him with great ability, and everywhere manifests a competent ac- 
quaintance with the subject with which he deals." 


Crown 8vo. 6s. 
Kingsley (Charles) — 


8vo. 3s. 6d. 
THE WATER OF LIFE, and other Sermons. Crown Svo. 3s. 6d. 

THE EARTH. Crown 8vo. 3s. 6d. 
SERMONS FOR THE TIMES. Crown Svo. 3s. 6d. 
GOOD NEWS OF GOD. Crown Svo. 3s. 6d. 

Svo. 3s. 6d. 
DISCIPLINE, and other Sermons. Crown Svo. 3s. 6d. 
WESTMINSTER SERMONS. Crown Svo. 3s. 6d. 
ALL SAINTS' DAY, and other Sermons. Crown Svo. 3s. 6d. 
ACADEMY. — "We can imagine nothing more appropriate than this edition for a 
public, a school, or even a village library." 

Kirkpatrick (Prof A. F.)— THE DIVINE LIBRARY OF THE 
OLD TESTAMENT. Its Origin, Preservation, Inspiration, and 
Permanent Value. Crown Svo. 3s. net. 
THE DOCTRINE OF THE PROPHETS. Warburtonian Lectures 
1S86-1SQO. Third Edition. Crown Svo. 6s. 


Knight (W. A.)— ASPECTS OF THEISM. 8vo. 8s. 6d. 
LETTERS FROM HELL. Newly translated from the Danish. With 

ail Introduction by Dr. George Macdonald. Twenty-eighth 

Thousand. Crown Svo. 2s. 6d. 

Lightfoot (Bishop)— 

'^^^^ ^II^!J^^^^ MINISTRY. Reprinted from Dissertations on 

the Afostohc Age. Crown Svo. 3s. net 

in the Diocese of Durham, and Edition. Crown Svo 6s 

Crown Svo. 6s. 

svo. 6s. 

Svo. 6s, 

DIOCESE OF DURHAM, 25th Nov. 1886. Demy Svo 2s 

gion." Svo. I OS. 6d. 



TIMES. — " As representing all that is now available of the Bishop's profound learning 
and consummate scholarship for the illustration of his great subject, the present volume 
and its successor will be warmly welcomed by all students of theology." 

Lillillgston (Frank, M.A.)— THE BRAMO SAMAJ AND 
TIANITY. A Study in Indian Theism. Cr. Svo. 2s. 6d. net. 

Macmillan (Rev. Hugh) — 

BIBLE TEACHINGS IN NATURE. 15th Ed. Globe Svo. 6s 

ALLEGORY. 5th Edition. Globe Svo. 6s. 
THE MINISTRY OF NATURE. Sth Edition. Globe Svo. 6s. 
THE SABBATH OF THE FIELDS. 6th Edition. Globe Svo. 6s. 
TWO WORLDS ARE OURS. 3rd Edition. Globe Svo. 6s. 
THE OLIVE LEAF. Globe Svo. 6s. 

FOR THE YOUNG. Crown Svo. 3s. 6d. 

SPEA KER. — "These addresses are, in fact, models of their kind — wise, reverent, and 
not less imaginative than practical ; they abound in choice and apposite anecdotes and 
illustrations, and pCJsess distinct literary merit." 

DAILY CHRONICLE.— "Tue poetic touch that beautifies all Dr. Macmillan's 
writing is fresh in every one of these charming addresses. The volume is sure to meet 
with cordial appreciation far beyond the sphere of its origin." 

THE CORN OF HEAVEN. Crown Svo. [/« the Press. 

Mahaffy (Rev. Prof.)— THE DECAY OF MODERN PREACH- 
ING : AN ESSAY. Crown Svo. 3s. 6d. 


Marshall (H. Rutgers)— INSTINCT AND REASON: An 
Essay with some Special Study of the Nature of Religion. 8vo. 
I2S. 6d. net. 


Maurice (Frederick Denison) — 

THE KINGDOM OF CHRIST. 3rd Ed. 2 Vols. Cr. 8vo. 7s. 

THE CONSCIENCE. Lectures on Casuistry. 3rd Ed. Cr. 8vo. 4s. 6d. 


SCRIPTURES. 2nd Edition. Crown 8vo. 6s. 

THE RELIGIONS OF THE WORLD. 6th Edition. Cr. 8vo. 4s. 6d. 

HISTORY. Fcap. 8vo. 2s. 6d. 

LEARNING AND WORKING. Crown Svo..- 4s. 6d. 

MANDMENTS. Pott 8vo. IS. 

Collected Works. Crown 8vo. 3s. 6d. each. 


Volumes. 3s. 6d. each. 

CHURCH TIMES. — "There is probably no writer of the present century to whom 
the English Church owes a deeper debt of gratitude. . . . Probably he did more to 
stop the stream of converts to Romanism which followed the secession of Newman than 
any other individual, by teaching English Churchmen to think out the reasonableness 
of their position." 

SPEAKER. — '* These sermons are marked in a conspicuous degree by high thinking 
and plain statement." 

TIMES. — " A volume of sermons for which the memory of Maurice's unique personal 
influence ought to secure a cordial reception." 

SCOTSMAN. — "They appear in a volume uniform with the recent collective 
edition of Maurice's works, and will be welcome to the many readers to whom that 
edition has brought home the teaching of the most popular among modern English 

Medley (Rev. W.)— CHRIST THE TRUTH. Being the 
Angus Lectures for the year 1 900. Crown 8vo. 6s 


LORD. Fourth Edition. Crown 8vo. 5s. 

SPECTA TOR.—" The argument is put with brevity and force by Dr. Milliffan, and 
every page bears witness that he has mastered the literature of the subject, and has made 
a special study of the more recent discussions on this aspect of the question. . . . The 
remaining lectures are more theological. They abound in striking views, in fresh and 
^gorous exegesis, and manifest a keen apprehension of the bearing of the fact of the 
Kesurrection on many important questions of theology. The notes are able and 
scholarly, and elucidate the teaching of the text." 

OUR LORD. Baird Lectures, lZ<)i. Crown 8vo. 7s. 6d. 

Moorhouse (J., Bishop of Manchester) — 

JACOB : Three Sermons. Extra fcap. 8vo. 3s. 6d. 

THE TEACHING OF CHRIST. Its Conditions, Secret, and 

Results. Crown 8vo. 3s. net. 

8vo. 3s. net. 

CHURCH TIMES. — " It may almost be said to mark an epoch, and to inaugurate a 
new era in the history of Episcopal visitation." 

TIMES. — "A series of diocesan addresses, full of practical counsel, by one of the 
most active and sagacious of modem prelates." 

GLOBE. — '* Throughout the volume we note the presence of the wisdom that comes 
from long and varied experience, from sympathy, and from the possession of a fair and 
tolerant mind." 

MANCHESTER GUARDIAN. — " Full of interest and instruction for all who take 
an interest in social and moral, to say nothing of ecclesiastical, reforms, and deserves to 
find careful students far beyond the limits of those to whom it was originally addressed." 

Gl. 8vo. ss. 

QUESTION. Crown 8vo. 6s. 
SCOTSMAN.—" The book is eloquently, and at times brilliantly, written. . . . But 
few readers could go through it without being inspired by its clever and animated hand- 
ling of philosophical ideas." 

MANCHESTER GUARDIAN.— " At, interesting and suggestive little book." 

Pattison (Mark).— SERMONS. Crown 8vo. 6s. 


QUESTION. Crown 8vo. 6s. 
PHILOCHRISTUS. Memoirs of a Disciple of the Lord. 3rdEd. 8vo. 12s. 

8vo. 6s. 

THOUGHT. Fcap. 8vo. 3s. 6d. 


PRO CHRISTO ET ECCLESIA. Crown 8vo. Gilt top. 4s. 6d. net. 
BOOKMAN.— " 1\. is not only its anonymity which suggests comparison with Ecce 
Homo. The subject is the same in both books — the method and aim_ of Jesus — though 
treated from quite different points of view ; and the level of thought is much the same ; 
the easy originality that cuts a new section through the life of Christ and shows us strata 
before unthought of ; the classic severity of the style, the penetrating knowledge of human 
nature, the cathoHcity of treatment, all remind us of Professor Seeley's captivating work." 

Purchas (Rev. H. T., M.A.). JOHANNINE PROBLEMS 

AND MODERN NEEDS. Crown 8vo. [/« the Press. 

Reichel (Bishop). — SERMONS. With a Memoir. Crown 8vo. 6s. 


CHRISTIANS. Crown 8vo. 5s. 
Ridding (George, Bishop of Southwell).— THE REVEL AND 
THE BATTLE. Crown 8vo. 6s.' 
TIMES.' — " Singularly well worth reading." 
MANCHESTER GUARDIAN.—'' Marked by dignity and force." 

Robinson (Prebendary H. G.)— MAN IN THE IMAGE OF 

GOD3 and other Sermons. Crown Svo. 7s. 6d. 
Robinson (Canon J. A.)— UNITY IN CHRIST AND OTHER 

SERMONS. Crown Svo. 6s. 
Rutherford (W. G., M.A., Headmaster of Westminster). — THE 

KEY OF KNOWLEDGE. Sermons preached to Westminster 

Boys in the Abbey. Crown Svo. 6s. 
Seeley (Sir J. R.)— ECCE HOMO : A Survey of the Life and 

Work of Jesus Christ. Globe Svo. 5s. 

A THEN./EUM. — " If it be the function of a genius to interpret the age to itself, this 
is a work of genius. It gives articulate expression to the higher strivings of the time. 
It puts plainly the problem of these latter days, and so far contributes to its solution ; a 
positive solution it scarcely claims to supply. No such important contribution to the 
question of the time has been published in England since the appearance in 1866 oi Ecce 
Homo. . . . The author is a teacher whose words it is well to listen to ; his words are 
wise but sad ; it has not been given him to fire them with faith, but only to light them 
with reason. His readers may at least thank him for the intellectual illumination, if they 
cannot owe him gratitude for any added favour. ... A book which we assume will be 
read by most thinking Englishmen." 

MANCHESTER GUARDIAN.— ''T^iQ present issue is a compact, handy, well- 
printed edition of a thoughtful and remarkable book." 

Selborne (Roundell, Earl of).— LETTERS TO HIS SON ON 
RELIGION. Globe Svo. 3s. 6d. 
3s. 6d. 

Service (Rev. John). — SERMONS. With Portrait. Crown Svo. 6s. 
Stanley (Dean) — 

Westminster Abbey. 2nd Edition. Crown Svo. 2s. 6d. 

Stewart (Prof. Balfour) and Tait (Prof P. G.)— THE UNSEEN 
FUTURE STATE. 15th Edition. Crown Svo. 6s. 

Stubbs (Dean)— '''' 

STUB.S, B.D.rDe:: ormTto^^slt V"' ^^ ^- ^• 

centre of much exceUent social wori^ln ^^lf^'%''~J'^ '^^' '™« Ae 
yet been promoted to the Deane.^ o^fIv T^ Mr Stubbs, who had not 
and the preachers •-The Q"" "- f^'^ • -^ followmg are the subjects 

Rev. ChLles Stubbs D D Ten^ Jw ^^'Af •'" .^" ^^^'"^ = ^y the Very 
by the Very Rev G W Et^in D D^' n?"'Vn*t R^-'-°f History^ 
Realm of Philosophy : by Ae Rev R F t ^."^^iV"".^^"'' '" *^ 
Lecturer in iS88 -ChnV ;^ flU ri , E- ^""ett, M.A., Bampton 
K^.j Ar A TT , "-""^t 1° the Realm of Law: bv the Rpv T -R 


Vicar of Gr^nwich. -Christ in the Realm of Sociology! by The Rev S A 
Barnett M A., Warden of Toynbee Hall, and CanS^ '.f Bristol -Chr^i 
of Ely. '^'- ^y *' ^^^ ^"^- ^^"'^= Stubbs, D.D., Dean 

^.£S?^t'?^'^'~" 1^'" prelections will be found stimulating and instructive in a hi^h 
?tt^=.h,fiT T "^ deserves recognition as a courageous attempt W J™ to Chr Tstlanuv 
Its nghtftil place and power in the lives of its professors. " v-nristianity 

Fcap. 8vo. 3s. 6d. 

24, 25, and 26, 1899. 8vo. Sewed. 2s. net. 

Temple (Archbishop). See Canterbury. 

Thackeray (H. St. John).— THE RELATION OF ST. PAUL 

Treilcll(Archbishop).—HULSEAN LECTURES. 8vo. 7s. 6d 

Van Dyke (Henry).— THE GOSPEL FOR AN AGE OF 
DOUBT. The Yale Lectures on Preaching, 1896. Cr. 8vo 
8s. 6d. 

SCOTSMAN. — "While the lectures are in no danger of being challenged as hetero- 
dox, the last charge that will be made against the author will be that he fails to discern 
the spirit of the age or the attitude of mind, and the outstanding reasons of that attitude, 
of multitudes of thoughtful and reverent people towards the teaching of the Churches." 

VaugKan (C. J., Dean of Llandaff) — 

8vo. 103. 6d. 


Vaughan (C. J., Dean of Llandaff) — contimted. 

HEROES OF FAITH. 2nd Edition. Crown 8vo. 6s. 

Extra fcap. 8vo. 2s. 6d. 

Edition. Fcap. 8vo. 3s. 6d. 
FOES OF FAITH. 2nd Edition. Fcap. 8vo. 3s. 6d. 
THE TWO GREAT TEMPTATIONS. 2nd Ed. Fcap. 8vo. 3s. 6d. 


4s. 6d. 
" MY SON, GIVE ME THINE HEART." Extra fcap. 8vo. 5s. 
TEMPLE SERMONS. Crown 8vo. los. 6d. 

AUTHORISED OR REVISED ? Sermons on some of the Texts in 
which the Revised Version differs from the Authorised. Crown 
8vo. 7s. 6d. 

PRAYER. Four Courses of Lent Lectures. Crown 8vo. lOs. 6d. 


IS. 6d. 

THE PRA.YERS OF JESUS CHRIST : a closing volume of Lent 
Lectures delivered in the Temple Church. Globe 8vo. 3s. 6d. 

DONCASTER SERMONS. Lessons of Life and Godliness, and 
Words from the Gospels. Cr. 8vo. los. 6d. 



SATURDAY X E VIE tV.— "These discourses in thought, in style, have so much 
that is permanent and fine about them that they will stand the ordeal of being read by 
any serious man, even though he never heard Dr. Vaughan speak." 


TIMES. — "As specimens of pure and rythmical English prose, rising here and there 
to flights of sober and chastened eloquence, yet withal breathing throughout an earnest 
and devotional spirit, these sermons would be hard to match." 

SCOTSMAN. — "Alt are marked by the earnestness, scholarship, and strength of 
thought which invariably characterised the pulpit utterances of the preacher." 


Crown 8vo. 5s. 

RELIGIOUS. Crown 8vo. 5s. 
NATIONAL OBSERVER.— "In discussing Questions 0/ tht Day Mr. D. J. 
Vaughan speaks with candour, ability, and common sense." 


antiquated dogma and personal salvation, and negkct the weightier matters of the law." 

whafhe haff JS p^-ffi3/^A-.-"He speaks boldly as well as thonghtfuUy, and 
wnat ne has to say is always worthy of attention." a j. 

ir.f^f^/''^^?^ r/.l/£.y._" Most of them are social, and these are the most interest- 
IJS'„„ °"' '^S,"^^ of peculiar mterest is that in those sermons which were preached 

, . , K ^ ^■^° '-"non.Vaughan saw the questions of to-day, and suggested the remedies 
we are beginnmg to appl}'. 

TL\N HOPE. Hulsean Lectures for 1875. Crown 8vo. 6s. 6d. 


OTHER ESSAYS. 8vo. los. 6d. 

ST. JAMES'S GAZETTE.— "iAr. Ward's reputation as a philosophical thinker at 
once accurate, candid, and refined, and as the master of a literary style alike vigorous, 
scholarly, and popular, has been amply established by his previous works. That it is well 
worthy of his reputation, is enough to say in commendation of his new book." 

DAILV^ CHRONICLE. — "His whole book recalls men to those witnesses for the 
unseen, which laboratories cannot analyse, yet which are abundantly rational." 

TIMES. — " A series of brilliant and suggestive essays. . . . This pregnant and sug- 
gestive view of the larger intellectual tendencies of our own and other ages is enforced 
and illustrated by Mr. Ward with much speculative insight and great literary brilliancy." 

Welldon (Right Rev. J. E. C, Bishop of Calcutta).— THE 
SPIRITUAL LIFE, and other Sermons. Crown 8vo. 6s. 

SCOTTISH LEA BER.—" In astrain of quiet, persuasive eloquence. Bishop Welldon 
treats impressively of various aspects of the higher life. His discourses cannot fail both 
to enrich the heart and stimulate the mind of the earnest reader." 

GLASGOW HERALD. — " They are cultured, reverent, and thoughtful produc- 

Westcott (B. F., Bishop of Durham) — 


Sermons. Crown 8vo. 4s. 6d. 
GIFTS T'OR MINISTRY. Addresses to Candidates for Ordination. 

Crown 8vo. is. 6d. 
THE ^TCTORY OF THE CROSS. Sermons preached during Holy 

Week, 1888, in Hereford Cathedral. Crown 8vo. 3s. 6d. 

Memoriam J. B. D.) Crown 8vo. 2s. 
THE HISTORIC FAITH. 3rd Edition. Crown Svo. 6s. 
CHRISTUS CONSUMMATOR. and Edition. Crown Svo. 65. 


Westcott (Bishop) — continued. 


THE WEST. Globe 8vo. 5s. 
THE GOSPEL OF LIFE. Crown Svo. 6s. 

TIMES. — "A collection of sermons which possess, among other merits, the rare one 
of actuality, reflecting, as they frequently do, the Bishop's well-known and eager interest 
in social problems of the day." 


CHURCH TIMES.— "Wc heartily commend this volume to the notice of our 
readers. . . . The Church of England is not likely to lose touch with the people of this 
country so long as she is guided by Bishops who show such a truly large-hearted 
sympathy with everything human as is here manifested by the present occupier of the 
see of Durham." 

LITER A TURE. — " A sermon of the national day of rest, and some attractive per- 
sonal reminiscences of schooldays under James Prince Lee, are among the choicest parts 
of the volume, if we are to single out any portions from a work of dignified and valuable 

DAILY NEWS. — " Through every page . . . runs the same enlightened sympathy 
with the living world. One forgets the Bishop in the Man, the Ecclesiastic in the Citizen, 
the Churchman in the Christian." 

THE OBLIGATIONS OF EMPIRE. Cr. Svo. Sewed. 3d. net. 

LESSONS FROM WORK. Charges and Addresses. Crown 
Svo. 6s. 


Two Vols, Svo. 2 IS. net. 

TIMES. — " Is certainly one of the most comprehensive, and, in our judgment, one of 
the most valuable historical works that have appeared for many years. . . . He has 
chosen a large subject, but it is at least one which has clear and definite limits, and he 
has treated it very fully and comprehensively in two moderate volumes. . . . His book 
appears to us to be based on much original research, on an enormous amount of careful, 
accurate, and varied reading, and his habit of appending to each section a list of the 
chief books, both ancient and modern, relating to it will be very useful to serious students. 
He has decided opinions, but he always writes temperately, and with transparent truth- 
fulness of intention." 

DAILY CHRONICLE.—" The story of the struggle of searchers after truth with 
the organised forces of ignorance, bigotry, and superstition is the most inspiring chapter 
in the whole history of mankind. That story has never been better told than by the 
ex- President of Cornell University in these two volumes." 

Wickham (Very Rev. Dean).— WELLINGTON COLLEGE 
SERMONS. Crown Svo. 6s. 

Wilkins (Prof. A. S.)— THE LIGHT OF THE WORLD : an 
Essay. 2nd Edition. Crown Svo. 3s. 6d. 

Wilson (J. M., Archdeacon of Manchester) — 

Second Series. 1888-90. Crown Svo. 6s. 

ESSAYS AND ADDRESSES. Crown Svo. 23. 6d. net. 

GUARDIAN. — "We heartily welcome a new edition of Archdeacon Wilson's 
Essays and Addresses." 


Wilson (J. M., Archdeacon of Manchester) — conn?iued. 

\j^^^'^^^^' — ^'^'^ ^^ S^^'i to welcome a new edition of the Archdeacon of 
M2^zhci&^^r\ Essays and Addresses. . . . These addresses are manly, straightforward, 
and sagacious ; and they are, moreover, pervaded with a deep sense of responsibility and 
unfailing enthusiasm." 

OF OUR TIME. Crown 8vo. 6s. 

Lectures for 189S. Crown 8vo. 3s. 6d. 

SPEAKER. — " This volume deserves a cordial welcome, and will reward a careful 
study. It is marked by a candour and courage, a sincerity and liberality of spirit, which 
prove very attractive." 

OXFORD MAGAZINE.— ''T\i^y contain a good deal of strong thought and 
delicate expression." 

SPECTA TOR. — *' A notable pronouncement." 

Sewed. 6d. net. 


MANCHESTER GUARDIAN.— " StrWing, stimulating and suggestive lectures. 
. . . The author writes with the boldness and conviction of a mystic ; he brings wide 
reading to bear upon every branch of his subject, and his book is impressive and 
interesting throughout." 

Printed by R. & R. Clark, Limited. Edinbur^ti-